The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink Aboutagenda.hpc.20030514ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MAY 14, 2003 CITY COUNCIL MEETING ROOM 130 S. GALENA ASPEN, COLORADO b NOON - SITE VISIT - 311 S. First, 432 W. Francis, Meadows Trustee-Unit 2, and 202 S. Garmisch - Site visit on your own. 5:00 I. Roll call II. Approval of minutes Clpt, L 4 +0; III. Public Comments IV. Commission member comments V. Disclosure of conflict of interest (a9tual and apparent) VI. Project Monitoring VII. Staff comments: Certificates of No Negative Effect issued (Next resolution will be #11) VIII. OLD BUSINESS 5:05 A. 331 W. Bleeker, Final Review -666Â¥/ 4.,c 4- 12(~li~\4- '12 3_ , 0 /<1 1 Z, 8 -6)ket-0 6 yrkle i+031 J l Qu 00 11 9+41 91411,1/..../1 IX. NEW BUSINESS 5:25 A. 311 S. First, Minor Development Aa, &44):f--15 - 60-,CE.tot, 4 /1,#fcÂ£Â£/2-94 5:45 B. @53 432 W. Francis, Minor Development 6-otificum-Â£, 11/lail D-- if'lÂ« 6:05 C. 202 S. Garmisch, Request to de-list 0 124 /1 6:30 D. Meadows Trustee Townhomes, Unit 2, Minor Devel nentAitrt /O 63,1-Â·Â·-:. .CA,-<DE .4 fit- -1 X. WORKSESSIONS None 7:00 XI. ADJOURN PROJECT MONITORING ' Jeffrey Halferty 428 E. Hyman (former Sportstalker Store) 213 W. Bleeker (Schelling) 101 E. Hallam (Gorman), with Neill 216 E. Hallam (Frost/Auger), with Mike 735 W. Bleeker (Marcus), with Teresa 922 W. Hallam 110 W. Main (Hotel Aspen) 118 E. Cooper (Little Red Ski Haus) Neill Hirst 434 E. Main (Hills) 409 E. Hyman (New York Pizza building) 205 S. Third 101 E. Hallam (Gorman), with Jeffrey 635 W. Bleeker 110 E. Bleeker Mike Hoffman 950 Matchless Drive (Becker) 216 E. Hallam (Frost/Auger), with Jeffrey 513 W. Smuggler (Harman) 633 W. Main (Dart) 920 W. Hallam (Guthrie) 640 N. Third Teresa Melville 232 W. Main (Christmas Inn) 323 W. Hallam (Rispoli) 513 W. Bleeker 735 W. Bleeker (Marcus), with,Jeffrey 515 Gillespie (Bone) 501 W. Main Street (Christiania Lodge) Valerie Alexander 216 E. Hallam (Frost) 533 W. Francis (Gibson) 232 W. Main (Christmas Inn) Derek Skalko 135 W. Hopkins 302 E. Hopkins 50 I W. Main Street (Christiania Lodge) 1 01\ m 'i' i ) lili i /1 liN 1 Un -11-11.11 1 1.4. i,Hn , Â·0l, ' ):i -el.'tz'-r-,9-*I./F..... 1,Â·ilÂ·1 1'1'41 lujl'.N\ PT-*4 i [fi7r~1).Ulil-1\ 41 1.1 0 *l)}1 )1 fl)~!<I 13!Yll.i-i-1 UL-* i~Â·tim fill .16(lli 80)Â·t-- di-f.94'ElvER.*3~ 4,,7.1 1Â¥/ L -1.Â¢ 6- .IL, 4>L L i] j.il 'il ---- --- grimig:dum:IM/Alizipmull/micalls/1//ailm/Â¢TJ 1 = -I 1 1 ir- 0 01 1-1 z :c 1 - F/'R- kil )11 1,-â€ž. d 1- 1- /J- 1-11)9 2 11-1.-4% .- *-11 .1+ 4 /:(11 f ~1 --B-, r -9-14.1â‚¬L m aL,r 1141- I. 4 1 1-1 41 -111 1.\El 1 H!)11111 \ /0 -\'1(.1 J/0 -1:1 01 01N ELS 3 '.Hp l11 11 1.1.'1&(1 61 11 10),fl~ .10 "102)11 LIJ)[1311%1 11100.1 ?il[Ill[p .\lil' 03[IC[~115 ... Â· / : .Â·Â· . Â·.Â· C.Â· ~Â· .tÂ·'.1:Â·.rÂ·.e~ Â£râ€¢~Â·j 4 :ti<VI Â·.Â· I / . -9 1 . . 03.21*110*.ffir,r'....i....i \ t[I\\ 1-.}tllI }1'..111.3 411 ljllij ' 'i\(411) tiAltilth .13[13,1,LIEL]-3 1lltil l 3 .14 \.Â·1,31.log #illl r~;'l.~l'!Ij)1~.3 .Wil'tÂ·/(1-1-DH Â£ arud uo 1)[lt- /zjb,14 ?P 0,\1,145 -1,,IF)1)ll[.li.I .1..1.,1-I.Id Â·Illl .103 3 ill(}.39 lit)11[1'dllic)3 F.lp! l.in il ll -1 I I -1." 411 [1 0 .' "~ f'11 fy-. r 740 i . 6 31- i Blillwc .11 4.1.11[!1 lit [Il po. 11 ' 4, pl .-11.-t, ,7- , 61 Il' -'Â· / Lt-'-5 f ' il -' :-,\Ll )lil 1911-) i tippr il 111(11[-I ~JIJ/\1 .\Ap>~.P I ---11 + alll .4,1.)1:1.1115 -1.11.101\ 3 p \131.IUÂ·% 01 I 4 11/ 1 1 , "4' / 1 â€¢ .111 T . k 7 1 r w q '4 3-*L 1'Â· Ol 31 ,-linS 11., A . ij '-cr.j,9 1.Il' 1,13-~5,1311.11 t .~ seÂ® >p illi~ \\ pic.,4, 1-jill' l.~Filli~ 1'[inrd >1.lbll').1.1.1 /â€ž3%, -J 1 Â£ , l. 7 -4 464 '11 1]1[Â·\'\ 11.AAC)1.14 11'..3\, ,-Illl, Alll: Flill<Ill[Y;lll -1 - 4 1 HU ,\ >]31-li} r Liu Pmul'0111 pllt' '3.10(lp ~~ ~~ 1 imtolp -ilillt)IN Ill.,AA .Â·<5~1,3~1-138 .)ln ;' ;'~ ,kt i '-, Â· -1Â£ 1 1 111<V Y 3/1111 H .91-qu ' !+ =* I /*1 _'I|Il hWL, 2-, 1 r 4 1 2-- i .,fjf'0~ 1 - I 4 - I. '.1 lili IlL 11 1 14 , ADA#:~ ... ~ ~; ill.y, ~... 1,1 -t, c. ~% j. Â·4itlti | |2-% :7 . Fa:4 ~(0-4~43 /*4 , 43-I~,t 1,-,i~TU A Â«r, 1%', g /4-44' 4:.-; ~:f c Â·~ ~.<~~210*j;~-, Â· :'.34 I . 4. l" I JT 4 1 7+ 1 -1. 1 119- 51- 4 15 *I. .:I :.; iÂ· ' . 1, 24, IL _ 3% i -Iiti ~I _f: I t~ ~ , Â·+I ..2,/ It 76. 2..1.:2 Jiteff.9,-74Â·4*' p.1. r 'vt Fill 11_f |A~ 2:B Â£ l :.1 1 -6 -t 4,1.Hrce i v 4 1 ki: ./.i ~ I I 11 r ./ ' ./ 11+ t Â·~ ~ r 1: f ~ 'Â· Â·. '... 7 ty 9 .Â·-4-f ~.., v ..4. j, 'Â· i:/t t, ' '17.--P )~,-;.4 4Â·~ .. --. -Â· -- -ree,i~~--4 ~rt, ,- t. FE , fi -L '1 4 1 =4 1114- -1-Â·ri -Cri .. 1 17- 1 - 119*Â· 1 -*Ii' . 19 ~ 44'. 4 + ... A Â·%3 .- Â· ..-4,446-jâ‚¬*+JÂ·f,~9* '81 -r $ 4*4 841 44. 1.95 4. 14 4 ~ 1 .1 7 ~ 7. , '~ A' ~~ ~';2#. Â·-*Ari ''11Â·~ i.li: 1-/t I ....R.depr b. I ./ 9 9. ..,.AJÂ·Â·Â·~IC. . -'4 14 Â· Â· Â·Â· - i.t~Â©elÂ·~ul.>-4~..:r<b,.1 )17N717 -2~0)~ 71 1 -1 -1 IN M 1 9| ATE:FtÂ» 466Â«25 1- h 119 1-CL FINISHES ..\1] Models 1 1.- 1- ' %.Â», r, - I:~-1 0Â»Uk *Ste !* .VMOC m.04#*44.:iflftÂ¢ ' 17'; 3~1 1, -r W . I 1 .0 9-030-,(.m --.?~ r, itt.~ .: 71?~ 333~34{ff)2.2-(3: , 1:~Ii-t.itS.:9Â·1 -49<4*Tagpif:Pki,UÂ« , / 4. : 44-i--MT#%*.Â·th:~:,)- 0 ' *3Â·iÂ·Â·35.:i*,22/.-*t-JI-:~ 4.:t .... Â¥.Â·I=Plm,5*Â¥3'fi;10.~ir- ,Â£"d~ &94+-*~flic: 4:/*f*j.1 k'' :. .,....r. f 7111,14?,-, 7Â¢Ef ~f 1. . 0 -,p d.'A.~pâ€¢Â·UP*.7, 54.%'*.f:-491:Â·syff :.14Â·44-J&*:f 1 2 L - >(iffms-1 3 Z~-4 /ID.- 7 Ve!,-11,21-16 Palln.1 4,1[in HI:'c[. DE Antique F|tab.2 AL P,Â·1\ 1.1 2/ Ari-,3\0 (-1.,thsni.lin veldic.!1- p.1[11121 lounli i.4.loilard Â·,11.111 ft.Lim ilizieb: <11-lien\-19 7#._litul *Â·.ia.ir,i~,er-+7Â».42,#*,edâ‚¬n-2,Â£.:- GLASS COL.ORS All Models 5 0~ 614:*fle.7 ! , S -3'i~T.42?44R,}.PFA*44Â·;~: i \,% h il 426 \2 11|[,1 6-19[litin '.,~~~~~~iherbll,_:1 AL / i 1, l.'3 C Ill { 7~ 1,110 X.'11! / vol ,1,;til.11Â·k Ili Bel 1-. Ic i: i-i, --.'ll--â€¢'Ir.-/4. - FROS rEI) GLASS DESIGNS En_,st,Â·d Pilil Nea![C F 21 (.A\,ubble iii 14,1-14Â¢[Cv .hel-:1-0,-1 . 7 'llid t. .Le (,111'. 1 En'.4, d Nul.11, pilliÂ·C FE I.U.111.0,1, ill 1-1!.ilillillt!{111 42:|'[es 1-11(,(1,Â·Â»L' 1-1 -1 aud HUM- I 4 ,nk, 1 ORNAM ENTAI ION Al<)ittere> ierieb Ewirgreen Series Carmel Series \[ission Series AR h { Dve it ,- (,6, 4 Buliall)\\ ( UnlinÂ· e (31 1~ dolld Lill l 11-erl.r f. (2) 1 1 Hill,iest C h_ila'Â·g N E--B:U- 0,0112.1. '1 1 1 1 1 Tuttle If.ctil. 1')\.e.ilal, rp. i<!.,1.1%01-1[!41 r.1~~4 2-jE H' [-ill!#ii,ll!"El-,Ii.1 Fill.ti. t P[i ,1 !1 L o 1 + 66-4(Â»C Ape L C b (-FF weeepeup corm@- INSTALLATION NOTES: 1-' 11.- ..Ayll 1 -1 3= , i â€¢14 674;1F Â·Â·' 9 -.- 5 - -1 --/1- gm< 7| REQUIRES 12V SUPPLY TO LAMPS FROM A - -11 REMOTE TRANSFORMER-TEKA #300 OR U.L. , 1 1 ---1,.. - -Im'fll...1/2 1-1 1- - .1 I .t '411 :*U-2 4 F. - 9.-'jr JI LISTED GARDEN TYPE, SUPPLIED BY OTHERS. - 1 -eF." 1 4 14 1 4rr, THE FIXTURE STEM CAN BE: 4 - ' IW:'4â€¢ ' 5 4 r I -. . [1] BURIED DIRECTLY IN EARTH USING ' 1, CLAMP-ON BLADES ACCESSORY #30 FOR 4- ' 4 $ te STABILITY; 111 7 L [2] THREADED INTO ASTANDARD WIRING ' C-' ~ !Â·Â·Â·Nk.Â·N.:,t , . â€¢ <01 BOX WITH COVER HAVING A %" IP ENTRY USING THREADED BRONZE NIPPLE ACCESSORY #31; [3] POWERED WITH A TRANSFORMER ADAPTOR KIT #20 [ELECTRONIC TYPE] WHICH ACCEPTS THE FIXTURE STEM AND THREADS INTO 72' IP, 12OV WIRING BOX OR , 4* i' 1 1 r , 11 4 i 1 CAN BE INSTALLED USING ANCHOR SPIKE %4,2221 h 1 - - 4- I I 4,1 - 45 - KIT #33 WITH POWER THROUGH CONDUIT; 1 21 ; 1, [4] INSTALLED USING A PVC LIGHT POST #32 - 3 1 WHICH ALLOWS FOR TWO CONDUIT STUBS;- f i .t i .11 -1 [5] INSTALLED AT MOUNTING HEM*ITS UP TO 4 FT. USING REPLACEMENT EXTENSION STEM #41, #42 OR #43 WHICH MAY BE lf: 3 ORDERED TO SPECIFIED LENGTH. I t. 'fr. , 20 I, 1% 4 i I. v -44 1 r ' * TEKA 3 a k . L__J t 1130 ) 1110 PATH LIGHT - - BRASS ~ PRODUCT GROUP: 1000 BRASS /1 1 1 DELIVERS A WIDESPREAD, EVEN, DOWN- 1 1 1 1 LIGHT WASH OF LIGHT OVER PLANTING AND PATHWAYS WITHOUT AWARENESS OF THE COPPER -COPPER BRASS -- BRASS LIGHT SOURCE. --i LAMP: 2-1OW G4 HALOGEN LAMPHOLDER: BI-PIN CERAMIC IMEL .- DIFFUSER: 316" TEMPERED, ETCHED GLASS VOLTAGE: 12V 1630 BRA~IJ NICK~f~Â«~760 MATERIAL OPTIONS: I ' I ' COPPER WITH BRASS FINIAL: 1130 Gag ALL BRASS: 1110 :KEL -BRASS VERDE -VERDE NICKEL ON COPPER WITH BRASS FINIAL - AND STEM: 1630 VERDE ON COPPER WITH NICKEL FINIAL AND VERDE STEM: 1760 DIAGRAM NOTES: 6 1/2 1. SOLID COPPER, BRASS, NICKEL ON 2. COPPER OR VERDE ON COPPER LAMP HOUSING. 2. BRASS OR NICKEL ON BRASS FINIAL, 3 1/4 REMOVABLE FOR TOP RELAMPING, WITH 1. TAMPER-PROOF SCREW. 3. ETCHED GLASS DIFFUSER, 316" THICK. 4. COPPER, BRASS OR VERDE ON COPPER SUPPORT STEM. 5. SEALED, WATER-TIGHT LAMP 1 2 COMPARTMENT. 1 6. U.L. LISTED FOR WET LOCATIONS. 3. --12 4. 2 TEKA K '.1- I , - [1 I ' I. 419'.7 0 ' < â€ž. Â·l +** .: . U:.9 ./'' ./.30 ;. 1~ , 1 4 _ , - ' ' 91 73,54* 2 -i, 4 ' , . -91 I. , r & i 9$ Â· gy. Y Â·' + 4:EE e -4 , . I .' ' -'t *ri.:I I..:r.3~21 9:45.-1.1/?26*6256.244 J.f'Â£,1-t,Â·:L/&3: Ah'' A:Z#- ' .4, , f fk ....CialÂ«*.35.i -~10-=0->'-f,Uk=13-Â»=-<Â·~4.-UZ--2- -P- A - Â»74' 7.' .,5. -3.9.4,4965. 1 71-5 2.*beyfs(re - tyÂ·:t..,~.pÂ·e, ="CÂ« nrej' ri?kj<~.i:. r & . :4-*lili... I . *.-1 Â·24#,2.. <itrks#+74 ' t.i~ ' 2.--44Â·--'Â·4k6#bkitati 413-~ifff.~5226f- -- I .% i - - . - 'w -, - r-'/f- - v#44 1: b, 7 92:f):tr~dj. 4.4,9,4 - w- 3 - 16 0 ' - -/-- 4,3:Â£44#. - 4. 94 "P : :.&17 : ..fi 'DPE.2---32.Z-Ji::t3%%12.3/rizz:Jr.+-39t.9..1,- . :'.1.1 . U : 11 7.. . - I -, > 9/-- Ii' ,+ r - 1 . " : U :<5- 1/42-: ' -11-2 0-6 4 4 , -- - 1 . .. . I % --I l... - - - --1 ~....~*~16, .Â«:**fagg. N :i,(* 99'%/ '-. ,~t,t, 4 C--1- 25650:14** -NÂ·-: *-1,Â·4% 341 .191 1,>~ --f~f<,s:-F,4.37.91 /111 :.,tr 1 I 2~Jrz; C i:2- i,4 t - ..2 f 5.4. . 46*---3.,-i -/k> i (~2~:~~~~ # +ldlktk k<> ,\ , 1 /1 13,/ 72 4Â»4 :- . I I j ---36.0 /,1 / 6 / \\ 1 / r/- - 3 }!2+1 . . /, 1 , -Â· -r \ Al ./. .* 2.3,N_' =A).1-FA-.4 ' . - 1 i ',,#,:*44 j lyâ‚¬- i-24-Â·. ..2-,4 Â· ti, Al/:ti- *-1,2..1 ., f , ...~rt{,1691,13.,51/.figÂ·6.*tri:KE- ' i Â·-Â·>â€¢Â·~-Â»VI '~ =33/ Â· - Â· t .\,i.141 00Â·â€ž12/ t ' I . F.,. \.c~2-3-~,1- 58 $ 1.t I * .2. ' i f.2:J.YÂ£Â·~ . 4.:C-ti .Â·- ,,1.. <.. Â·:1t 1 6. .r i / 1 \. - :K- L // I 'Â»'I, . /2, 4 . , I-=,* 'Â·4.--.ry 11 2: 9 '-4+ / 41 T ., f,}/- , '1 ?C 1-1, t Â·har. 't,.. ) r ; ; - ~2). d /74*444$4ff>,4 0 +J 'Gy,Â« 2ipte, 1'* 4 tltr-r< - ' *,f, , - 4& ..# A 1 3~ rl - . *I : 4- 3..9. e ' i , - iÂ·'.2 404./.h; :2 $ 3 - ' ' I . 1 : â€ž-,ty ... 4~ j ./ . I 1 rk 4 4 - .2 fte - L - . Â· I ... , i / 'â€¢i' I Â·0 4 . * 1 . r " 13Â·Â·'' :-frl -I.- I , 1 X . .' >j .-2 - 'â‚¬.a. 1 4 4 4 ..C +*Air - . 7- .1 t't ..â€¢.6 3 3.-1:,t~ i , .094,9-Ji#4,01- ,4- 'A %, ./ *Ack 1 ... 4 - 42*291 , , I '' ' .2 *i #' i:- . 2 . 2 + 4 -â€¢t ' P er r ----L z r 'Ay't - ''rjr:u.8...........,fj-"I'~I-'.e,6 Â· 7-- -:f :5::4~ Â·I;Â·--:Inij~i:'3-.2,- *4?33 2143,6Â¢4;40#6~f~A~~11~Yi:~IDI>jf~NZEd . * 7 . I .. I / ..< r. , ' -- - 1, I. # '24 'I /, \ I , M 3-Â·Â· : 4 - iâ€¢I.49: / ...39*t~. 4 Â»4:1, 4. -fir 6 I ./-124)69..4./0/' VV , + I a. I 412.:%41.tra U- t ~rÂ¢Ut-,1,42 I - - + ~4 I r , , - , : I / 11 - L 9 1 I ./ i r r=,2 1. I ..1 1 - . 3 . I. - *EN .. 2:.Â£'"I . f ' L , k : e.z- ..6 - i.11' ,/ 9, '1* 2 ./ - Â·14 Â· - ,/ ' 6 1 . 9-4 1 -1. 1 2 .4- z .1-0 1, '+ -it ,-' 1 A /6- 0001 S31hI3S 1Hell HlÂ¥d Â£0-4=Â£:..6-G.: Â· ' - _ , Â·â€¢' 4 , c : i I , t. 42. I 41 3 - L 'Al 'I .4 . y I /' -' . .4 , 1 --44: - - - RT.~ * â€žD;:,off' ' . 'Vt< 49: f.-Â·~j'~34{f~lf j)1~~ilF'~93<0,9201'df 9 ,.;.r,bir -,4, 33432 v <~4<Ffit.r,y)$~'G'Â·Li "Â·"Â· w,#3.Â·,1 ~'..~1 -'~'31 NO]1-VN I Wn 11(' *.C . 22 46 Â»92 Â«*,#u .'c, ' Â·tw.'ir 0-9NNAM+2~%NAU 59. 1- 1.- , 46 4. .Il ..3 â„¢ . 34. h ct Â»frt - ' ' - '...:~Ft:~~ 1-*.~~~#*:~#'e.~AlÂ©*35/.ffit~Ovitut'.P.~.**~.4.Â¢3Â¢11~ /4/ : it' 4Â«fÂ· 1 r- -2 ..il ; ' , 1616 -6.41141. -'*-*41,"r--'Â·E-7'2 . , - 1 3-' IF AJ MEMORANDUM TO: Aspen Historic Preservation Commission THRU: Joyce Allgaier, Deputy Planning Directox]NM Amy Guthrie, Historic Preservation Officer FROM: Katie Ertmer. Assistant Historic Preservation Planner RE: 33 1 W. Bleeker - Major Development Review (Final)- Public Hearing DATE: May 14,2003 SUMMARY: HPC granted Conceptual approval for the construction of a new home on this lot at its regular meeting on April 9. 2003. The neighboring historic resource is a two-story, Queen Anne style house. Because the entire site remains listed on the "Aspen Inventory of Historic Landmark Sites and Structures," the proposed building must receive HPC approval and must comply with the "City of Aspen Historic Preservation Design Guidelines" and the Land Use Code. This is an application for Major Development (Final.) APPLICANT: Chris Berry, represented by Mitch Haas, Haas Land Planning, LLC. PARCEL ID: 2735-124-41-001. ADDRESS: 331 W. Bleeker Street, Lot C, Block 44, City and Townsite of Aspen, Colorado. ZONING: R-6 (Medium Density Residential). MAJOR DEVELOPMENT (FINAL) Major Development is a two-step process requiring approval by the HPC of a Conceptual Development Plan, and then a Final Development Plan. Approval of a Conceptual Development Plan shall be binding upon HPC in regards to the location and form Of the envelope of the structure(s) and/or addition(s) as depicted in the Conceptual Plan application including its height, scale, massing and proportions. No changes will be made to this aspect of the proposed development by the HPC as part of their review of the Final Development Plan unless agreed to by the applicant. The procedure for a Major Development Review, at the final level, is as follows. Staff reviews the submittal materials ancl prepares a report that analyzes the project's conformance with the design guidelines and other applicable Land Use Code Sections. 1 This report is transmitted to the HPC with relevant information on the proposed project and a recommendation to continue, approve, disapprove or approve with conditions and the reasons for the recommendation. The HPC will review the application, tile staf.f analysis report and the evidence presented at the hearing to determine the project's conformance with the City of Aspen Historic Preservation Design Guidelines. The HPC may approve, disapprove, approve with conditions, or continue the application to obtain additional information necessary to make a decision to approve or deny. Staff Finding: A [ist of the design guidelines relevant to Final Review is attached as "Exhibit B.' HPC granted Conceptual approval for this project on April 9,2003 with the following condition: For Fined review, the applicant will restudy the width of the front path. The applicant has straightened the path and has reduced its' width. The path begins perpendicular to the street, but turns to avoid a large tree, which the applicant is preserving. Staff finds the new design and proposed materials for the front path to be appropriate. Final review focuses on selection o f building materials, landscaping. and lighting. Staff finds the proposed privacy fence between the two houses to be appropriate. It is a wood fence that does not extend beyond the front fa~ade of either structure. The applicant has provided a lighting plan with cut sheets of the proposed light fixtures. Staff finds the locations of the lights and light fixture styles to be appropriate. Staff has concerns with the material palette on the front half of the house. The West End is primarily comprised of wood sided structures, and this is certainly true of the 19[1' Century buildings in the neighborhood. The proposed materials and the detailing of the house is more commercial iii character than what is typical of the neighborhood. The height of the stone foundation and the inclusion of stone string courses in particular are out of context. The guidelines in Chapter 11 discuss using materials that are similar in finish to those used historicallv. Brick is a material that was typically used for commercial buildings and very upscale residences. Staff finds that the masonry is not creating a relationship with the type of material that was used on the neighboring historic residence. Staff finds that the applicant should restudy the material palette for the front half of the house. 2 ec dÂ·, b / 1, 1 ,32*11 Â· /261322Â·, 1 ! L 11:!!1.:11 1 11 =271 1 1. 1 -/75~| *-23(----~i -,f 3=.f= 4 * M 8 0 Q. la: r n 11 1 1 7 Proposedfagade on Existing fagade on new residence historic residence The guideline in question is: 11.8 Use building materials that contribute to a traditional sense of human scale. a Materials that appear similar in scale and finish to those used historically on the site are encouraged. Staff finds the proposed material palette on the rear half o f the house to be appropriate. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends the HPC continue the public hearing for Final review of 331 W. Bleeker street to a date certain so that the material palette for the front half of the house can be restudied. Since materials are the central issue of this discussion, granting Final and referring the restudy to Staff and monitor for approval does not see appropriate. There is an attached resolution without a condition regarding the material palette, which contains standard conditions for Final approval if that is the direction iii which HPC chooses to go. RECOMMENDED MOTION 'I move to continue the public hearing for Final review of 331 W. Bleeker to June 11, 2003." Exhibits: A. Staff memo dated May 14,2003 B. Relevant guidelines C. Application 3- 1 14 M Exhibit B - Relevant Guidelines Fences 1.3 A new replacement fence should have a "transparent" quality allowing views into the yard from the street. u A fence that defines a front yard is usually low to the ground and "transparent" in nature. u On residential properties, a fence which is located forward of the front building facade may not be taller than 42" from natural grade. (For additional information, see the City of Aspen's "Residential Design Standards".) A privacy fence may be used in back yards and along alleys, but not forward of the front facade of a building. Note that using no fencing at all is often the best approach. Contemporary interpretations of traditional fences should be compatible with the historic context. 1.5 A side yard fence which extends between two homes should be set back from the street-facing facade. o This setback should be significant enough to provide a sense of open space between homes. 1.6 Replacement or new fencing between side yards and along the alley should be compatible with the historic context. o A side yard fence is usually taller than its front yard counterpart. It also is less transparent. A side yard fence may reach heights taller than front yard fences (up to six feet), but should incorporate transparent elements to minimize the possible visual impacts. o Consider staggering the fence boards on either side of the fence rail. This will give the appearance of a solid plank fence when seen head on. u Also consider using lattice, or other transparent detailing, on the upper portions of the fence. Walkways 1.9 Maintain the established progression of public-to-private spaces when considering a rehabilitation project. 3 This includes a sequence of experiences, beginning with the "public" sidewalk, proceeding along a "semi-public" walkway, to a "semi-private" porch or entry feature and ending in the "private" spaces beyond. o Provide a walkway running perpendicular from the street to the front entry. Meandering walkways are discouraged, except where it is needed to avoid a tree. o Use paving materials that are similar to those used historically for the building style. Concrete, wood or sandstone may be appropriate for certain building styles. 4 0 0 0 Private Yard 1.10 Preserve historic elements of the yard to provide an appropriate context for historic structures. o The front yard should be maintained in a traditional manner, with planting material and sod, and not covered with paving, for example. 1.11 Preserve and maintain mature landscaping on site, particularly landmark trees and shrubs. o Protect established vegetation during construction to avoid damage. Replacement of damaged, aged or diseased trees must be approved by the Parks Department. 1.12 Preserve and maintain historically significant planting designs. o Retaining historic planting beds, landscape features and walkways is encouraged. 1.13 Revisions or additions to the landscape should be consistent with the historic context of the site. o Select plant and tree material according to its mature size, to allow for the long-term impact of mature growth. o Reserve the use of exotic plants to small areas for accent. o Do not cover grassy areas with gravel, rock or paving materials. 1.14 Additions to the landscape that could interfere with historic structures are inappropriate. o Do not plant climbing ivy or trees too close to a building. New trees should be no closer than the mature canopy size. o Do not locate plants or trees in locations that will obscure significant architectural features or block views to the building. o It is not appropriate to plant a hedge row that will block views into the yard. Site Lighting 1.15 Minimize the visual impacts of site lighting. o Site lighting should be shielded to avoid glare onto adjacent properties. Focus lighting on walks and entries, rather than up into trees and onto facade planes. Streetscape 1.16 Preserve historically significant landscape designs and features. o This includes the arrangement of trees, shrubs, plant beds, irrigation ditches and sidewalks in the public right-of-way. Building & Roof Forms 11.7 Roof materials should appear similar in scale and texture to those used traditionally. o Roof materials should have a matte, non-reflective finish. 5 Materials 11.8 Use building materials that contribute to a traditional sense of human scale. o Materials that appear similar in scale and finish to those used historically on the site are encouraged. o Use of highly reflective materials is discouraged. Architectural Details 11.9 Use building components that are similar in size and shape to those of the historic property. o These include windows, doors and porches. o Overall, details should be modest in character. 11.10 The imitation of older historic styles is discouraged. This blurs the distinction between old and new buildings. Highly complex and ornately detailed revival styles that were not a part of Aspen's history are especially discouraged on historic sites. 6 O 0 RESOLUTION OF THE ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION APPROVING AN APPLICATION FOR MAJOR DEVELOPMENT (FINAL) FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 331 W. BLEEKER STREET, LOT C, BLOCK 44, CITY AND TOWNSITE OF ASPEN, COLORADO Parcel ID #2735-124-41-001 RESOLUTION NO. , SERIES OF 2003 WHEREAS, the applicant, Chris Berry, represented by Mitch Haas, Haas Land Planning, LLC, has requested Major Development Review (Final) for 331 W. Bleeker Street, Lot C, Block 44, City and Townsite of Aspen, Colorado; and WHEREAS, Section 26.415.070 of the Municipal Code states that "no building or structure shall be erected, constructed, enlarged, altered, repaired, relocated or improved involving a designated historic property or district until plans or sufficient information have been submitted to the Community Development Director and approved in accordance with the procedures established for their review; and WHEREAS, for Final Major Development Review, the HPC must review the application, a staff analysis report and the evidence presented at a hearing to determine the project's conformance with the City of Aspen Historic Preservation Design Guidelines per Section 26.415.070.D.4.b.2 and 3 of the Municipal Code and other applicable Code Sections. The HPC may approve, disapprove, approve with conditions or continue the application to obtain additional information necessary to make a decision to approve or deny; and WHEREAS, Katie Ertmer, Assistant Historic Preservation Planner, in her staff report dated May 14, 2003 performed an analysis of the application based on the standards, and recommended the application be continued for further review; and WHEREAS, at a regular meeting held on May 14, 2003, the Historic Preservation Commission considered the application after a duly noticed, public hearing, took testimony, found the application to meet the pertinent standards, and approved with conditions the application by a vote of to . THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED: That the HPC approves Major Development (Final) for the new house located at 331 W. Bleeker Street, Lot C, Block 44, City and Townsite of Aspen, Colorado, with the following conditions, finding that the review standards are met: l. HPC staff and monitor must approve the type and location of all exterior lighting fixtures by reviewing a plan prior to wiring, purchasing, or installing the fixtures. 2. Information on all venting locations and meter locations not described in the approved drawings shall be provided for review and approval by staff and monitor when the information is available. 3. There shall be no deviations from the exterior elevations as approved without first being reviewed and approved by HPC staff and monitor. 4. The conditions of approval will be required to be printed on the cover sheet of the building permit plan set and all other prints made for the purpose of construction. 5. The applicant shall be required to provide the contractor with copies of the HPC resolution applicable to this project. The contractor must submit a letter addressed to HPC staff as part of the building permit application indicating that all conditions of approval are known and understood and must meet with the Historic Preservation Officer prior to applying for the building permit. 6. The General Contractor and/or Superintendent shall be required to obtain a specialty license in historic preservation prior to receiving a building permit. APPROVED BY THE COMMISSION at its regular meeting on the 14th day of May, 2003. Approved as to Form: David Hoefer, Assistant City Attorney Approved as to Content: HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION Jeffrey Halferty, Chair ATTEST: Kathy Strickland, Chief Deputy Clerk MEMORANDUM TO: Aspen Historic Preservation Commission THRU: - Joyce Allgaier, Deputy Planning DirectaDAA FROM: Katie Ertmer, Assistant Historic Preservation Planner RE: 311 S. First St. - Minor Development - Public Hearing DATE: May 14,2003 SUMMARY: The property currently contains a historic structure that is attached to a newer structure by a basement and a small connector piece at ground level. The applicants would like to remove the connector between the historic building and newer structure, give a facelift to the newer structure, and add a one car garage. APPLICANT: Paul and Elaine Sandler, Represented by Raul Gawrys. PARCEL ID: 2737-124-68-004. ADDRESS: 311 S. First Street, Lots R&S, Block 54, City and Townsite of Aspen, Colorado. ZONING: R/NIF - Residential Multi-Family. MINOR DEVELOPMENT The procedure for a Minor Development Review is as follows. Staff reviews the submittal materials and prepares a report that analyzes the project's conformance with the design guidelines and other applicable Land Use Code Sections. This report is transmitted to the HPC with relevant information on the proposed project and a recommendation to continue, approve, disapprove or approve with conditions and the reasons for the recommendation. The HPC will review the application, the staff analysis report and the evidence presented at the hearing to determine the project's conformance with tile City of Aspen Historic Preservation Design Guidelines. The HPC may approve, disapprove, approve with conditions, or continue the application to obtain additional information necessary to make a decision to approve or deny. If the application is approved, the HPC shall issue a Certificate of Appropriateness and the Community Development Director shall issue a Development Order. The HPC decision shall be final unless appealed by the applicant or a landowner within three hundred (300) feet of the subject property in accordance with the procedures set forth in Chapter 26.316. 1 The applicant is planning to remove a non-historic connecting element between the historic building (constructed in 1887) and the newer structure (constructed in 1980.) There are no other proposed changes to the historic building except for repairing the wall where the connector will be removed, and general maintenance, including re-roofing and painting. They are proposing to construct a one-car garage within the non-historic structure and are planning some fagade changes and the addition of gabled roof elements to soften that building. Staff finding: A list of the design guidelines relevant to this project is attached as "Exhibit B." This memo will discuss only those that staff finds are not met by the proposal. The addition and connector were built before the guidelines were in place. The applicant is not proposing the construction of a new building or any additions to the historic building. Chapter 10 of the current guidelines discusses additions. It says that the removal of later additions that detract from the character of the building should be considered. Guideline 10.2 states that more recent additions that are not significant may be removed. The connection and newer building were constructed in 1980 and are out of character with the historic building. Staff finds that the addition and connector piece are not sympathetic to the historic structure and that the removal of the connector piece will visually separate the two buildings. The applicant must provide samples of the materials that will be used to repair the wall from which the connector is being removed. These materials will be subject to staff and monitor approval. Staff finds the proposed addition of the garage in the non-historic building is appropriate. The garage doors are on the opposite site of the building from the historic building and face the alley. Staff has concern that the two half-moon shaped windows proposed on the front fagade of the newer house are out of character with the historic building. This is also out of compliance with Residential Design Standard 26.410.040(D)(3)(b), which states: No more than one non-orthogonal window shall be allowed on each fagade of the building. A single non-orthogonal window in a gable end may be divided with mullions and still be considered one non-orthogonal window. Staff recommends that the non-orthogonal windows on the front fagade be changed to orthogonal (rectangular or square) windows. This would also be more in keeping with the character of the historic building. The following guideline is in question: 11.9 Use building components that are similar in size and shape to those of the historic property. o These include windows, doors and porches. 2 Staff also has concerns regarding the elimination of the front porch. The proposed new entryway is flush with the wall. The Residential Design Guidelines require the use of a front porch element. Standard 26.410.040 (D) (1)(b) states: A covered entry porch Offifty (50) or more square feet with a minimum depth ofsix feet (6'), shall be part of the front fagade. Entry porches and canopies shall not be more than one story in height. Staff finds that the proposed entry is not a porch. While this proposal involves the renovation of an existing building and not the construction of a new structure, the Design Guidelines still apply. Chapter 11 discusses the use of porches on new buildings on landmarked properties. The guideline is question is: 11.4 Design a front elevation to be similar in scale to the historic building. o The front should include a one-story element, such as a porch. The existing conditions of the 1980 building include a small front porch, and while there will not be the construction of a new building, the proposal includes an exterior renovation this structure. Staff finds that the applicant should either maintain the existing front porch or include a new front porch element on the 1980 building. Staff finds the proposed materials to be appropriate, as they are more complimentary to the historic building than what currently exists. The gable elements are similar to the roof forms that are found on the historic structure and are also appropriate. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends continuation of the application for Minor Development for 311 S. First Street in order that the applicant can address the non- orthogonal windows and front porch elements. (If HPC finds the non-orthogonal windows and the entryway as proposed in the application are appropriate, the applicant will need variances from the Residential Design Standards which will need to be publicly noticed before they can be approved.) RECOMMENDED MOTION: "I move to continue the public hearing of 311 S. First Street to (a date certain.)" Exhibits: A. Staff memo dated May 14,2003 B. Relevant Guidelines C. Application 3 Exhibit B - Relevant Guidelines Existing Additions 10.2 A more recent addition that is not historically significant may be removed. Mass and Scale 11.4 Design a front elevation to be similar in scale to the historic building. The primary plane of the front should not appear taller than the historic structure. The front should include a one-story element, such as a porch. Building & Roof Forms 11.5 Use building forms that are similar to those of the historic property. o They should not overwhelm the original in scale. Materials 11.8 Use building materials that contribute to a traditional sense of human scale. o Materials that appear similar in scale and finish to those used historically on the site are encouraged. o Use of highly reflective materials is discouraged. Architectural Details 11.9 Use building components that are similar in size and shape to those of the historic property. o These include windows, doors and porches. o Overall, details should be modest in character. 4 00 4 4 EXHIS~~_ Â£21 ATTACHMENT 7 AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLIC NOTICE REQUIRED BY SECTION 26.304.060 (E), ASPEN LAND USE CODE ADDRESS OF PROPERTY: 81 *lit lifEC , Aspen, CO SCHEDULED PUBLIC HEARING DATE: MAY VE , 2003- STATE OF COLORADO ) ) SS. County of Pitkin ) (name, please print) being or representing an Afplicant to the City of Aspen, Colorado, hereby personally certify that I have complied with the public notice requirements of Section 26.304.060 (E) of the Aspen Land Use Code in the following manner: Publication of notice: By the publication in the legal notice section of an official paper or a paper of general circulation in the City of Aspen at least fifteen (15) days prior to the public hearing. A copy of the publication is attached hereto. ~~,, Posting of notice: By posting of notice, which form was obtained from the Community Development Department, which was made of suitable, waterproof materials, which was not less than twenty-two (22) inches wide and twenty-six (26) inches high, and which was composed of letters not less than one inch in height. Said notice was posted at least fifteen (15) days prior to the public hearing and was continuously visible from the day of , 200 , to and including the date and time of the public hearing. A photograph Of the posted notice (sign) is attached hereto. Mailing of notice. By the mailing of a notice obtained from the Community Development Department, which contains the information described in Section 26.304.060(E)(2) of the Aspen Land Use Code. At least fifteen (15) days prior to the public hearing, notice was hand delivered or mailed by first class postage prepaid U.S. mail to any federal agency, state, county, municipal government, school, service district or other governmental or quasi-governmental agency that owns property within three hundred (300) feet ofthe property subject to the development application. The names and addresses of property owners shall be those on the current tax records o f Pitkin County as they appeared no more than sixty (60) days prior to the date of the public hearing. A copy of the owners and governmental agencies so noticed is attached hereto. (continued on next page) . Rezoning or text amendment. Whenever the official zoning district map is in any way to be changed or amended incidental to or as part of a general revision of this Title, or whenever the text of this Title is to be amended, whether such revision be made by repeal of this Title and enactment of a new land use regulation, or otherwise, the requirement of an accurate survey map or other sufficient legal description of, and the notice to and listing of names and addresses of owners of real property in the area of the proposed change shall be waived. However, the proposed zoning map has been available for public inspection in the planning agency during all business hours for fifteen (15) days prior to the public hearing on such amendments. A *3 S g Ature The foregoing "Affidavit of Notice" was acknowledged before me this 1+ day of #171~ , 20023 by WITNESS MY HAND Al||tt00**nI@0ire@EAL 021102007 \.Â·03947 ~'2)TANZÂ·:% My commission expires: 't# 0 el- A. AcrWiAÂ» j-ek_ Notary~~ -) L_j Op COLO My Comils:lon B#es 810/2007 ATTACHMENTS: COPY OF THE PUBLICATION PHOTOGRAPH OF THE POSTED NOTICE (SIGN) LIST OF THE, OWNERS AND GOVERNMENTAL AGENCIES NOTICED BY MAIL + V 4 11 lilli 1 1 - L 1. n rb i ' 2 r W' -IL' -1, . 1- .- 1 - 1 - 1. Â£ i 1 1,--C.. - - 1 1 L -*# & . I *| | ~ fil,11~a, r 4 ff 4r 1 -9 1 + 1 -1, 1 9!11 -/1.--t- ...L---- 1 Ill 1 11 11 1 111 1 1 1 E- rh _i z- -2-1 4 , _ 3.- Ilw- Â¥ 1 IM,7/4* 1 < / 411@ijt3 f 6:il~, Â·' i ~4 - i :141'iI.L I Ap 'i!~i,d*%111 ' "41 1*.9--1.11.1111,M/*AN**~1,~i -lilli ~'i ~ i~~ 1 Wi14'41444-i-1 i 1'1"IMI i Â· /1 4 2 114 - , 11 t=.1, 1 , 1 1 $11 la'!1 1 44 - I i" Â·'++ iÂ· - i"'Â· 1 ~ 1!jk Â·*lili 4 . 1--111'Il I.. 1 . 1 1111111LA Â·- w ZI'[4 1/*#ii,L Ft'"'11'1%@111~~ki6hb~14[1~ -RAN~f rk i A-8111 J i~ ~Â·~-~Â·: <pli .1,#-]1~11It 11 1.1 - A-Â» -1 lilli f liM 1 11 1 11 1 1 9.1 - C i r 1:7 t, 1 1 11 '!lil#--iÂ·TÂ· , J lilli 1 111'11 It 1 111411 + 11"11 n -,- ,-it-ij~tj'~1#Ivj,j,#%'l_.1 .Â·2Â£2 1 " |0,~ i -1 4 i , iii ~,ii 1 ih'i Fi7L~||~~- i ' 4,1 **14. E - L . - 11 Al 11 11 1 1, = Ir -k 11Â·11 1 1 . . #MIF -1 -1 11.EfFIT>= tÂ®*1 _pil *"p 1 Â·Â·Â· '1Â· 1'|,Â· 1 J . 5 -mir 1 111"1==.1.Lcil f &1*41'il,1@1|1@PE~|~ i :,11 d~"*I'l-'I~1 - 3-1114.. 41!144. 1 Etj~ = 1.1, L -lili- 4 L * T+1-1 :Â· Â· -- flfilm/./ - 1 -1 7,111'1111 11~ I , , 1, A Ft'., 1 - 4- p EC=Ill 1 1 1 - 1 1 -- 1 Lit' Ti ~I/: Â· - ~~ ~; : !1 1*di JL,4,~101|1| ill,Â®141-1-21%*'3 iil**~r_ - 1.1. II - - 141:E .lIli'111 .: .6 lu!11 - - 1 1 11 1 lilli 4Â·1?t ,Â·10" r 1 1~14 .t .4 ' ? *Eli m I 1 1 01'[1 - 1///Li il'", 11 41 .V.na#NE" I!~;!1!1 11. 11--.1/Im#LE 411 Ii'~1*1~/////4~ 1 -A 1 . e.:1,11 7, 1%'1141~ 1 - 11 1-4 1 1 1 1 -1 113FI - t .ill'.i; 2 d~11 0 ~ 4'Â· 1 r 4* 14 -2 Ild{M -k- m- Â£-E&+k... IllkE 1 *3&-~rlm"LE. I t liI*bl,=- - a.7- .11 - 5 If --~ 1 7 1Â£ T f ...migpi-/I ~E=-21* Al~ 67Â» fi ~I~= 58' SE Â£222 ~Fi = a /- Ii,!-Ii.. lt-- 47 - - 1 4 EN Â»leilli 4- li~7* m . e 1=, - 9-- I : 74"#4*"* 11'1 - 191# i iIfT.ME=9:F=,ME , - -Â·21 *'ll lt,1 Lij~â‚¬ - I 9 0 1 L 1-1'T ~ t z 1.- */1 -E:*m*24- M.' r - Ee-24- * - ---=FE////m//5// -I â‚¬- e>3- -SkI - - A- e -.-- -- - 1 k - --Et li-,1 191*:i. - -I - Ill - -4. -I ./1,3312/08"*- 4 11 -1 1 1 2 25 - _ 4<.& 7Nfl I -- ---4- 4*r - -- - +P- 1 Â· ~n~ 1 -=ir .- ---= + =~ 1 -J:iny .111-iE ==-!- - - = 1 -- - - --4 r | - i -- ~KIE**A FT. =*L_:9== 4-2. . 4.. - - - 1 -r- - -11-- -- - ' +ttl : 7WT,Â·-4*;F~ 7 1-1 - 4-* 31 +1 *- - Talt - - - -17 -- 1 -:- -= ;%=l.lifiwi*kit.*~ E- RE''z- - -t' - - - 7-Â·2.- -*MI-*21[, - -rE+ - - - 1 - - v - - - - -- 7 3 7+ ~*~ - f-9,_ -f = - - -tr= --I-_- r -~~~~~I~..cr Â·Â· -1-1-,F p~,lim":1/3. 1 - -- U i ~i|@M+~~~ill'..=rÂ· Â·Â·I 9= - LEâ€¢= â€ž I **L/VI -1 - 2 - I L -4=1 11~ .... -â‚¬f= - 1 4--=119 41 - 1Â£--29*#ra~#ME 4+~ , p 1 M.r-* - _ -ii*,1/11 &+ 4 7 . 1 - ~71 *4-Â£1 1 - 1/lill"IM"'9=7#/*ITI-i,B--*42:AL,~~_ 2- -1 --- - ~ 4=- --91-#4-~,-41- --i=141!win f ,- 7 1-, 1.1/- - 1 ...2. . 1, ':I I = 91 Â·:iR: .==i lik!11- lumbi .- DAT-E - _=Ei - - meti - -f--==21&1 4 =- 1 - --- , TIWIC '4-11 4~W I- , Fli:,14'r.. PLACE - â‚¬ - ,Â· . 7 11 -. -L---- 5,/Bm -2 -flâ‚¬*%111 fit --'- =- -- 3 -1 PURASE -2 3=3*1 2 lien --Fi 1 _-I--- Ilt: I I Â·Â· 0~1 1'l# C 4- ir-i.11-34.1 1,1. In .. 9 4 .1 - 0-~ -1- - I - - ly-:11 ?1'7 8 - li ---.- --==== - 1 '1@r_ -6 -Er -- -- - - ~~52 L Â· 41 - ~1 Â· 1 -4 11~ Â· - !14 - =- - == 1-*-- - 1=0 -lEit------ .11 lit 4% - .- L ~ Â· n- E'llÂ· nr i t + 1- - - -- . I - 1-1 24%;1AMI 9 /fir ' 111-=:Â·Fbt- -1 - - .== -- -=6=4 - I ~Flk* 11-0 - -- 1111-2. ./ 141+ - 4 7 * -- - = 1 7 - ., C. - 4-12 11' + 4/m Â·i- - 1 2-141. 1 - ---+1- 53=f-60#i LE 215*#Tp * 1.= -1$7 1- -~~~ --~40pt-~2.ib-+ -7-~*7 â€¢1 2 i* *15- Â¥*--+ ~ 0 ' *i d; h#-4#-.* 11 1 12.-E- X imr r**2 1, 9 -th GL / imili- 9 Â£ a -/-=.--*d--z#*AJE- lie *9 -AE - -- , - -,0 -: .=,1--Â«r=- ,-4-3--* *2*4 4/ 2 $ -2 82 il I~~~4% I ~el ~11 - EE 01 ----=r Jji-'J-2-8 6 - 0 4 + 4-41f - I I.- - 1 7= - 2. # i. A - - 1 : 4% eed=f ' WF 3. r-ZE- . - - - 1 12Â·I 2 L 9 r I !.9 I I 1% ~im-E ~-- -Ai aian~* " -~- 1,_ILI' z - E --4 r 2. lili -.46:ftit,t - Â· i t 3- 4321 - Z --* Il ?,I -- ,~' F I '- _ 1 1,1~ p;- -ln - 11,1 - - Ee - T -- - - -13 .!2 - - 11 -44=- - 14 L ATTACHMENT 7 AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLIC NOTICE REQUIRED BY SECTION 26.304.060 (E), ASPEN LAND USE CODE ADDRESS OF PROPERTY: 4132-- U). 6(246)6- i<~ , Aspen, CO SCHEDULED PUBLIC HEARING DATE: 14 kipl , 2002 STATE OF COLORADO ) ) SS. County of Pitkin ). I, 24/ AU 'll (name, please print) being or representing an Applicant to the City of Aspen, Colorado, hereby personally certify that I have complied with the public notice requirements of Section 26.304.060 (E) of the Aspen Land Use Code in the following manner: Publication of notice: By the publication in the legal notice section of an official paper or a paper of general circulation in the City of Aspen at least fifteen (15) days prior to the public hearing. A copy of the publication is attached hereto. ~>~- Posting of notice: By posting of notice, which form was obtained from the Community Development Department, which was made of suitable, waterproof materials, which was not less than twenty-two (22) inches wide and twenty-six (26) inches high, and which was composed of letters not less than one inch in height. Said notice was posted at least fifteen (15) days prior to the public hearing and was continuously visible from the M day of 41>r 1 \ , 200_%-, to and including the date and time of the public hearing. A photograph Of the posted notice (sign) is attached hereto. Mailing of notice. By the mailing of a notice obtained, from the Community Development Department, which contains the information described in Section 26.304.060(IE)(2) of the Aspen Land Use Code. At least-fitteen (15) days prior to the public hearing, notice was hand delivered or mailed by first class postage prepaid U.S. mail to any federal agency, state, county, municipal government, school, service district or other governmental or quasi-governmental agency that owns property within three hundred (300) feet of the property subject to the development application. The names and addresses of property owners shall be those on the current tax records of Pitkin County as they appeared no more than sixty (60) days prior to the date of the public hearing. A copy of the owners and governmental agencies so noticed is attached hereto. \ (continued on next page) 772 GO MEMORANDUM TO: Aspen Historic Preservation Commission ' THRU: Joyce Allgaier, Deputy Planning Directo# Amy Guthrie, Historic Preservation Officer FROM: Katie Ertmer, Assistant Historic Preservation Planner RE: 432 W. Francis St. - Minor Development - Public Hearing DATE: May 14,2003 SUMMARY: The subject property is the site of the historic Hallet House and a historic outbuilding. This property is listed on the National Register of Historic Places. The applicant is proposing to add a roof deck to a non-historic garage at the rear of the property and a dormer on the historic carriage house. APPLICANT: Sugar Mountain Trust, Represented by Gideon Kaufman, Attorney, and Bill Poss and Associates, Architects. PARCEL ID: 2735-124-13004. ADDRESS: 432 W. Francis St., Lots K, L, and M, Block 34, City and Townsite of Aspen, Colorado. ZONING: R-6, Medium Density Residential. MINOR DEVELOPMENT The procedure for a Minor Development Review is as follows. Staff reviews the submittal materials and prepares a report that analyzes the project's conformance with tile design guidelines and other applicable Land Use Code Sections. This report is transmitted to the HPC with relevant information on the proposed project and a recommendation to continue, approve, disapprove or approve with conditions and the reasons for the recommendation. The HPC wiN review the application, the stajf analysis report and tile evidence presented at the hearing to determine the project's conformance with the City of Aspen Historic Preservation Design Guidelines. The HPC may approve, disapprove, approve with conditions, or continue the application to obtain additional information necessary to make a decision to approve or deny. If the application is approved, the HPC shall issue a Certificate of Appropriateness and the Community Development Director shall issue a Development Order. Tlie HPC decision shall be final unless appealed by the applicant or a landowner within three 1 hundred (300) feet of the subject property in accordance with the procedures set forth in Chapter 26.316. Staff finding: A list of the design guidelines relevant to this project is attached as "Exhibit B." This memo will discuss only those that staff finds are not met by the proposal. The applicant is proposing to add a roof deck to the non-historic garage on the alley- facing site of the property. They are also proposing to add a dormer to the north side of the historic outbuilding to match an existing dormer on the south side. The deck addition on the garage roof entails adding a railing and staircase to access a flat roofed area. Staff finds that the roof deck is appropriate as it is on a non-historic garage and is on the alley facing side of the building. The proposed railing materials are transparent in nature, however, Staff finds that a railing made of wood wouldÂ· be more appropriate than the proposed metal one. Staff also has concerns about the spiral staircase leading up to the deck. The ornate nature of the metal spiral staircase is out of context with the historic resource. Staff finds that a staircase made of wood would be more compatible with the historic resource. The following guideline is in question: 10.11 On a new addition, use exterior materials that are compatible with the historic materials of the primary building. o The new materials should be either similar or subordinate to the original materials. Staff has concerns about the addition of a second dormer to the historic carriage house. The proposed dormer is on a fa,?ade that is visible from Fourth Street. The proposed shed dormer is built to the ridgeline of the roof. There was some debate when the entire property was before a previous HPC about the size and location a similar dormer to the one that is proposed on the carriage house. Staff has concerns that the size of the proposed dormer is not subordinate to the historic roof and that it is not located below the historic ridgeline. Staff finds that a smaller, lower profile dormer would be more appropriate. The guidelines in question are: 7.7 A new dormer should remain subordinate to the historic roof in scale and character. o A new dormer should fit within the existing wall plane. It should be lower than the ridgeline and set in from the eave. It should also be in proportion with the building. o The mass and scale of a dormer addition must be subordinate to the scale of the historic building. 8.1 If an existing secondary structure is historically significant, then it must be preserved. 2 o When treating a historic secondary building, respect its character-defining features. These include its primary and roof materials, roof form, windows, doors and architectural details. 10.12 When constructing a rooftop addition, keep the mass and scale subordinate to that of a historic building. o An addition should not overhang the lower floors of a historic building in the front or on the side. o Dormers should be subordinate to the overall roof mass and should be in scale with historic ones on similar historic structures. o Dormers should be located below the primary structure's ridgeline, usually by at least one foot. A dormer that is redesigned to meet HPC' s direction and these guidelines could be reviewed and approved by Staff and monitor. Included with this memo, as Exhibits C and D are the national and local historic inventory forms for HPC's reference. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval for the Minor Development application for 432 W. Francis St. with the following conditions: 1. The applicant shall reduce the size and profile of the dormer on the carriage house, which is to be reviewed and approved by staff and monitor. 2. The applicant shall change the railing and staircase material to wood, which is to be reviewed and approved by staff and monitor. 3. There shall be no deviations from the exterior elevations as approved without first being reviewed and approved by HPC staff and monitor. 4. The General Contractor and/or Superintendent shall be required to obtain a specialty license in historic preservation prior to receiving a building permit. 5. HPC staff and monitor must approve the type and location of all exterior lighting fixtures by reviewing a plan prior to wiring, purchasing, or installing the fixtures. 6. These conditions of approval will be required to be printed on the cover sheet of the building permit plan set and all other prints made for the purpose of construction. RECOMMENDED MOTION: "I move to approve Resolution #_, Series of 2003." Exhibits: Resolution #_, Series of 2003 A. Staff memo dated May 14, 2003 B. Relevant Guidelines C. National register of Historic Places Inventory Form D. Aspen Architectural Inventory Form E. Application 3 Exhibit B - Relevant Guidelines Treatment of Roofs 7.6 When planning a rooftop addition, preserve the overall appearance of the original roof. o An addition should not interrupt the original ridgeline. See also: Chapter 10, Guidelinesfor Building Additions. 7.7 A new dormer should remain subordinate to the historic roof in scale and character. o A new dormer should fit within the existing wall plane. It should be lower than the ridgeline and set in from the eave. It should also be in proportion with the building. o The mass and scale of a dormer addition must be subordinate to the scale of the historic building. Secondary Structures 8.1 If an existing secondary structure is historically significant, then it must be preserved. o When treating a historic secondary building, respect its character-defining features. These include its primary and roof materials, roof form, windows, doors and architectural details. o If a secondary structure is not historically significant, then its preservation is optional. Rooftop Additions 10.11 On a new addition, use exterior materials that are compatible with the historic materials of the primary building. o The new materials should be either similar or subordinate to the original materials. 10.12 When constructing a rooftop addition, keep the mass and scale subordinate to that of a historic building. o An addition should not overhang the lower floors of a historic building in the front or on the side. o Dormers should be subordinate to the overall roof mass and should be in scale with historic ones on similar historic structures. o Dormers should be located below the primary structure's ridgeline, usually by at least one foot. 4 RESOLUTION OF THE ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION APPROVING AN APPLICATION FOR MINOR DEVELOPMENT FOR 432 W. FRANCIS, LOTS K, L, AND M, BLOCK 34, CITY AND TOWNSITE OF ASPEN, COLORADO RESOLUTION NO. , SERIES OF 2003 Parcel ID #: 2735-124-13004 WHEREAS, the applicant, Sugar Mountain Trust, represented by, Gideon Kaufman, Attorney, and Bill Poss and Associates, Architects, has requested Minor Development approval for the addition of a roof deck to a non-historic garage and a dormer on the historic carriage house at 432 W. Francis, Lots K, L, and M, Block 34, City and Townsite of Aspen, Colorado; and WHEREAS, Section 26.415.070 of the Aspen Municipal Code states that no building or structure shall be erected, constructed, enlarged, altered, repaired, relocated or improved involving a designated historic property or district until plans or sufficient information have been submitted to the Community Development Director and approved in accordance with the procedures established for their review. An application for a building permit cannot be submitted without a Development Order; and WHEREAS, the procedure for a Minor Development Review is as follows. Staff reviews the submittal materials and prepares a report that analyzes the project's conformance with the design guidelines and other applicable Land Use Code Sections. This report is transmitted to the HPC with relevant information on the proposed project and a recommendation to continue, approve, disapprove or approve with conditions and the reasons for the recommendation. The HPC reviews the application, the staff analysis report and the evidence presented at the hearing to determine the project's conformance with the City of Aspen Historic Preservation Design Guidelines. The HPC may approve, disapprove, approve with conditions, or continue the application to obtain additional information necessary to make a decision to approve or deny; and WHEREAS, Katie Ertmer, Assistant Historic Preservation Planner, in her staff report dated May 14,2003 performed an analysis of the application based on the standards, and recommended the application be approved with conditions; and WHEREAS, at a regular meeting held on May 14, 2003, the Historic Preservation Commission considered the application after a duly noticed, public hearing, took testimony, found the application to meet the pertinent standards, and approved the application by a vote of to THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED: That the HPC approves Minor Development for 432 W. Francis St., Lots K, L, and M, Block 34, City and Townsite of Aspen, Colorado with the following conditions: 1. The applicant shall reduce the size and profile of the dormer on the carriage house, which is to be reviewed and approved by staff and monitor. 2. The applicant shall change the railing and staircase material to wood, which is to be reviewed and approved by staff and monitor. 3. There shall be no deviations from the exterior elevations as approved without first being reviewed and approved by HPC staff and monitor. 4. The General Contractor and/or Superintendent shall be required to obtain a specialty license in historic preservation prior to receiving a building permit. 5. HPC staff and monitor must approve the type and location of all exterior lighting fixtures by reviewing a plan prior to wiring, purchasing, or installing the fixtures. 6. These conditions of approval will be required to be printed on the cover sheet of the building permit plan set and all other prints made for the purpose of construction. APPROVED BY THE COMMISSION at its regular meeting on the 14th day of May, 2003. Approved as to Form: David Hoefer, Assistant City Attorney Approved as to Content: HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION jeffrey Halferty, Chair ATTEST: Kathy Strickland, Chief Deputy Clerk % 2-06 \Oit- \ h OMB NoÂ· 1024-0018 MPS Form 10-930 10-31-87 2421 Expires 3 United States Department of the Interior only. 4~ National Park Service For NPS use ~~ National Register of Historic Places received ~- Inventory-Nomination Form date entered ~ See instructions in How to Complete National Register Forms ..2, Type all entries-complete applicable sections 1. Name -historic Samuel I. Hallett House (Higtori r Regources of_Aspen_- 61 and or common Hallett House - 1 2. Location - nla--notfor-publication street & number 432 WPAt Frmnoi g Street --. â‚¬1 city, town , Aspen - vicinity of n /9. code 097 .. state Colorado code 08 county Pi tkin ---/- 1 3. Classification - / Category Ownership Status Present Use LLS_ museum =Ik(adistrict -1*apublic _X- occupied Il/aagriculture RUB park _L building(s) _X- private Illaunoccupied .Uacommercial _*_ private residence â‚¬*structure -Beboth n,/awork in progress .I]laeducational Illa religious ~-1 Illasite Public Acquisition Accessible AZaentertainment nlayes: restricted Uagovernment 1 -Â«aobject n,/ain process nia- scientific ALa_ transportation n-Zabeing considered Illayes: unrestricted Alaindustrial . x mlltiple resource X -no h,la military - rvia- other: 2 4. Owner of Property *-- name Virginia Stranahan J street & number 577 East Front street *-- ,~ city, town Peirryburg Ohi0451 â‚¬-1 vicinity of state IL 5. Location of Legal Description - courthouse, registry ofdeeds, etc. Pitkin County Court House 1 street & number 506 E. Main Street --I---Ii- town Aspen state __Qalw2~-~.- __,.., ,2 6. Representation in Existing Surveys - State Inventory of Historic ~ 7 n-/e- yes .1- no p title Sites has this property been determinedeligible . date Ongoing n ka- federal __X- staterl. ,- - county n,Le- 'ocal ~ ~epositary for survey records Colorado Higtorips,1 Roni pty - OAMP - 87 7. Description .J Condition Check one Check one _R-_-excellent 44 deteriorated mla unaltered -2 original site nka good h Il/a ruins X altered n/a moved date n/a 1 Illa fair n/a unexposed Describe the present and original (if known) physical appearance Â·lt and The Hallett House is one of the Aspen houses which was bul day enlarged through the years around a log cabin. Its present the front appearance is that of a Miner's Cottage with a gabled L plan 04ood frame portion with a two story side gable section at the rear. The nd and clapboard house is sited on a corner with a low - wood wooden fence arou the property on both street sides. There is a large, two stor1 1 rted 7 barn with a gable roof and cupola at the rear which has been o~gntributing. j into a two car garage. (photo #10, 10a 10b) It is considered There is a front porch or veranda ~rith a low hipped roof gupported by rectangular wood posts which Wrap around all of the froht poftion, ~ the west side, the. south front arid in the L. - The paired and gillgle windows throughout are one-over-one, double hung wood sash. Trt:ablesse is notable for its simplicity with orily the peaks of the side- 6 bay ~ decorated with fish scale shirigles and a rectangular, one story S with a gable roof on the west side. have The transformation of the log cabin into a frame house mayfinest 1 begun in 1892 when Hallett remodeled his house into one of the orhoods J in the neighborhood with a lawn that was the envy of the neighD_g fork according to Frank L. Wentworth in his book, Aspen on the 82*3~of the (Lakewood: Frahbis B. Rizzati; 1950, p. 293)....Nothing is kno?/0en changes-that took place after that time until*~ the late 1940s.Â¥Euse Richard and Margaret Durrance found the log cabin inside the huvecords, , during remodeling. According to the Aspen Building Department room ~ a bedroom . and bath was added in 1953 -and a one story rame bat#- The addition with a low pitched roof was put onto the house in 1960 jiblj- one story frame addition near the rear on the east side is pror ~ one of these. Ih 1967, the front porch and roof were repairedLeling Little of the original interior elements of the 1892 remO.ng room remain other. than .the logs behind the present walls of the dirl>Â·stairs and a cast bronze fineplace with bas-relief designs in the dow. e name bedroom. The original carriage step, a cut stone. block with tneet -: a=*SUY=Trv~dei~tnÂ·Un~mcitss~~e~~etUS-~2222-luaL~-Ues~*st ~ide and a large blue spruce in the front yard. 1 9. 1 *WA.4 : ..Â· t--Â¢9. 11 'j 0 L_j .J r 8. Significance 88 . 11 Period Areas of Significance-Check and justify below ~,~ nia prehistoric Kll. archeology-prehistoric n/a community planning DZ@ landscape architecture}123 religion 4 n,Za 1400-1499 Illa archeology-historic Illa conservation 0/alaw Illa science 12. n/a 1500-1599 Gla agriculture nia economics nia literature Rfasculpture B~ 1600-1699 -2... architecture n,ZA education Illa military 3 social/ n/a 1700-1799 nla art BZA. engineering ne music humanitarian ..1 1800-1899 ]3lk commerce 02* exploration/settlement DZ@ philosophy 223 theater DZ@.1900- .Ula= communications ..1- industry n,/a politics/government a<a transportation Illd invention n/a other (specify) Specific dates ca, 1885-present Builder/Architect not known Statement of Significance (in one paragraph) The Hallett House is significant as one of the pioneer log cabins which was incorporated into a wood frame and clapboard house, a change - indicativeÂ·of Aspen's growth and the rising.fortunes of its residents during the 19th century silver mining.boom. Significance is also found in the association with Samuel I.Â·Hallett, the second owner whoÂ·was 9 - responsible for the 1892 remodeling, and-who was one of the "most ,;4 prominentÂ· and successful mine managers and- superintendents in Aspen." 1 1.5 BACKGROUND The owner of.the original log cabin, constructed ca. 1885-1886, was Thomas Anson; who,-' in 1887, sold it to Samuel I. and Julia Estelle 4 Hallett. --The property'remained in the Hallett family until 1935*. 2 [e Hallatt, bornhin Hornellsville, New York in 1858,-went to the Black Hills of South Dakota where he gained experience and knowledge in mining jl techniquest When Hallett arrived -ih Aspen in 1885, he had 'little trouble finding management positions with some of the lai'gest mining operations. By the 1890s he was the superintendent of the Smuggler ,,, Mining Company, the Smuggler Concentrator and the Aspen Sampling Company. He also served as secretary of the Durant, Compromise, the Late Acquisition ahd Conemara mining combanies as well as the secretary '11 of the Hallam Land Company. 1 Hallett ' s office was in the Hymin Block 31 (Hyman-Brand Building; listed on the National Register). 1 By the 1890s, Aspen had become a mature and cultured town with many fine residences and busindss blocks. In 1892, Hallett remodeled his log cabin home into one faced-in clapboard, which Was the prevelent : material for residential construction in Aspen at that time , 4 The Hallett House is a locally designated landmark. 19 0 1- Ilf .eli,:c..-,i NPS Form 903 89 0MB No. 1024-0018 0-82) Expires 10-31-87 United States Department of the Interior National Park Service 54+At# Ul; 14- i- ~~ 2 1-- C. -~ National Register of Historic Places Telits,Talt - --1 -1 - 1 + Inventory-Nomination Form datderfered Continuation sheet Significance Item number # 8 Page 2 Footnotes 1. Mines ang Mining Men of Colorad.g: Historical,-Descriptive and Pictorial (Denver: John G. Canfield, 1893), p. 49. 2. "Inventory of Historic Sites and Structures: , prepared for the City of Aspen by Vera Kirkpatrick and John Stanford, December, 1980. (Pitkin County Abstract of Lot Books) Aspen City Directory, 1889, 1892, 1893. 3. Mines and Mining Men, p. 49. Len Shoemaker, Pioneers of the Roar-in Fork (Denver: Sage Books, 1975), PP' 81-82. 4. Frank bÂ·.Â·Â·Â· Wentworth, Aspen on the RparingÂ·' Fork (Lakewood: Francis B. Riz.zari, 1950), p. 293. - - r. - I I - 1 1 1". 1 1=J I J L_J 3 9. Major Bibliographical References 90 -~. See footnotes 4 10. Geographical Data 31 Acreage of nominated property under one 3- Quadrangle name Aspen 1:24 000 Quadrangle scale UTM References 72 All'31 13~41113 2 10~ ~413|319[71810~ BLJ Ilili lillil[ 111 Zone, Easting Northing Zone Easting Northing 1 cllilill 11 L lilli' 11 D LL-1 Ilili'11111 El 11 14 El lilli Illilill lili Fllili 11111'll'1111 331 G L.L-1111 Ill li l lil 111 H'11111111111111.111 Verbal boundary description and justification 3 7 Block 34, lots K, L, M Aspen Townsite ~~ List all states and counties for properties overlapping state or county boundaries ''tr state n/a code county code ;tate code county code 11. Form Prepared By name/title Barbara Norgren .1 organization Consultant date July 13, 1986 street & number 7453 East Jefferson Dr. telephone 740-7860 -11 JJ city or town Denver : state Colorado 12. State Historic Preservation Officer Certification f 1 --= The evaluated significance of this property within the state is: __ national -- state - local J As the designated State Historic Preservation Officer for the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (Public Law 89- 665), I hereby nominate this property for inclusion in the National Register and certify that it has been evaluated according to the criteria and procedures set forth by the National Park Service. -4 State Historic Preservation Officer signature 1 title date l For NPS use only 1 hereby certify that this property is included in the National Register date - Keeper of the National Register date -1 -~ief of Registration L i:"49[0 ... 7 Â£ 4 1 111111 r... . . . 5 8 1 601- OAHP1403 Official eligibility determination Rev. 9/98 (OAHP use only) Date Initials COLORADO CULTURAL RESOURCE SURVEY Determined Eligible- N R Determined Not Eligible- NR Architectural Inventory Form Determined Not Eligible- SR Determined Eligible- SR (page 1 of 4) - Need Data Contributes to eligible NR District Noncontributing to eligible NR District 1. IDENTIFICATION 1. Resource number: 5PT.262 2. Temporary resource number: 432.WFR (432.WF) 3. County: Pitkin 4. City: Asoen 5. Historic building name: Samuel I. Hallett House 6. Current building name: Hallett / Durrance House 7. Building address: 432 West Francis Street, Aspen Colorado 81611 8. Owner name and address: Joan Reed Cundill 432 West Francis Street, Aspen C6lorado 81611 11. Geographic Information 9. P.M. 6 Township 10 South Range 85 West NW U of SW 1/4 of NE M of SE W of Section 12 10. UTM reference Zone 13;342350mE4 3 3 9 7 5 OmN 11. USGS quad name: Aspen Quadranqle Year: 1960, Photo Rev. 1987 Map scale: 7.5' X 15' Attach photo copy of appropriate map section. 12. Lot(s): K, L, & M Block: 34 Addition: Year of Addition: 13. Boundary Description and Justification: Site is comprised of Lot K, L, & M, Block 34 of the City and Townsite of Aspen. Assessors office Record Number: 2735-124-13-004 This description was chosen as the most specific and customarv description of the site. 111. Architectural Description 14. Building plan (footprint, shape): Irregular 15. Dimensions in feet: Length x Width 16. Number of stories: One Storv, Two storv at rear 17. Primary external wall material(s) (enter no more than two): Horizontal Wood Sidinq 18. Roof configuration: (enter no more than one): Gable Roof 19. Primary external roof material (enter no more than one): Wood Shingles Roof 20. Special features (enter all that apply): Porch Riasource Number: 5PT.262 Temporary Resource Number: 432.WFR Architectural Inventory Form (page 2 of 2) 21. General architectural description: A single storv wood frame structure, on a cut stone foundation. A qable end faces the street and has a pair of double hunqs as the principal window, centered on the clable, a small horizontal vent window sits in the qable end, both have a crown moldinq head detail. A cross clable extends to the east. A porch runs across the front of the front cable, wraps around the corner and extends along the cross gable to the east and down the length of the front qable to the west. The entrv sits 90Â° form the street under the porch, three vertically proportioned double huna windows sit facina the street under the porch. A small qable is overframed on the porch roof. Additions at the rear consist of a couple of hipped roof single storv forms with contemporary openings, and a two storv addition sits off the back of the front qable form creating a second cross qable at the rear. A flared chimnev sits on the cross aable ridge. Porch detailing is simple with square posts and a plain frieze board, simple trim delineates a capital on the posts. The front qable has a very small field of decorative shinqles at the peak. 22. Architectural style/building type: Late Victorian 23. Landscaping or special setting features: A low wood fence with a crenellated top separates the house from the street, This fence tvDe is attributable to Herbert Bever. Flowing irrigation ditch on west side. Owner added perennials along entire length. Two mature cottonwood street trees in west corner. Fence has perennial beds on both sides. Straiaht stone path leading to street. Lilac hedge at east and west propertv line. Large spruce at back corner. Carriage stone and hitchina post, original. 24. Associated buildings, features, or objects: A simple qable two story carriage house sits along the alley, a small lantern interrupts the roof line. IV. Architectural History 25. Date of Construction: Estimate 1885-86 Actual Source of information: Pitkin County Assessor 26. Architect: Unknown Source of information: 27. Builder/Contractor: Unknown Source of information: 28. Original owner: Thomas Anson Source of information: Pitkin County Assessor 29. Construction history (include description and dates of major additions, alterations, or demolitions): This structure began as a hand hewn loa cabin c. 1885, alterations were made soon thereafter c. 1892 to transform the structure into a claoboard sided structure in keepina with the eleaant homes beina built during that time. Nothing is known of the alterations that occurred until the late 1940's when the original log structure was discovered durina a remodel. Small additions occurred to the rear and the east side Rbsource Number: 5PT.262 Temporary Resource Number: 432.WFR Architectural Inventory Form (page 3 of 3) during the late 50's early 60's: repairs to the porch and roof, in 1967. The two story rear addition was added late 1980's, earlv 1990's 30. Original location X Moved Date of move(s): V. Historical Associations 31. Original use(s): Domestic 32. Intermediate use(s): 33. Current use(s): Domestic 34. Site type(s): Residential Neighborhood 35. Historical background: This structure is reoresentative of Asoen's minina era character. The building in particular represents the evolution of Aspen from a mining camp, into a complex society. This was a log structure originally and altered into the elegant house that exists today. S.I. Hallett was involved in management of the smuqqler mine as well as other mining related iobs. Margaret and Dick Durrance purchased the house in the late 40's. Thev were photographers and pioneers of early skiing in Aspen. 36. Sources of information: Pitkin Countv Courthouse records: Sanborn and Sons Insurance MaDs; 1990 and 1980 Citv of Aspen Survey of Historic Sites and Structures; 1986 National Reaister Nomination Form. VI. Significance 37. Local landmark designation: Yes X No Date of designation: 1981 Designating authority: Aspen City Council 38. Applicable National Register Criteria: A. Associated with events that have made a significant contribution to the broad pattern of our history; B. Associated with the lives of persons significant in our past; X C. Embodies the distinctive characteristics of a type, period, or method of construction, or represents the work of a master, or that possess high artistic values, or represents a significant and distinguishable entity whose components may lack individual distinction; or D. Has yielded, or may be likely to yield, information important in history or prehistory. Qualifies under Criteria Considerations A through G (see Manual) Does not meet any of the above National Register criteria 39. Area(s) of significance: Architecture 40. Period of significance: Late 1800's Silver Minina Era 41. Level of significance: National X State X Local X Fresource Number: 5PT.262 Temporary Resource Number: 432.WFR Architectural Inventory Form (page 4 of 4) 42. Statement of significance: This structure is significant for its position in the context of Aspen's mining era. It describes the evolution of an upper-class family or individual during that period, as well as the construction techniaues, materials available and the fashion of the time. 43. Assessment of historic physical integrity related to significance: Structure is intact and well maintained. Original log structure is completelv obscured, but that contributes to the significance of this structure. Rear addition is simple and does not dominate the original structure. VII. National Register Eligibility Assessment 44. National Register eligibility field assessment: This structure is currently on the National Register Eligible X Not Eligible X Need Data 45. Is there National Register district potential? Yes No X Discuss: If there is National Register district potential, is this building: Contributing Noncontributing 46. If the building is in existing National Register district, is it: Contributing __ Noncontributing Vlll. Recording Information 47. Photograph numbers: R2: F9,10 Negatives filed at: Aspen/Pitkin Community Development Dept. 48. Report title: Citv of Aspen Update of Survev of Historic Sites and Structures, 2000 49. Date(s): 6/29/2000 50. Recorder(s): Suzannah Reid and Patrick Duffield 51. Organization: Reid Architects 52. Address: 412 North Mill Street, PO Box 1303, Aspen CO 81612 53. Phone number(s): 970 920 9225 NOTE: Please attach a sketch map, a photocopy of the USGS quad. map indicating resource location, and photographs. Colorado Historical Society - Office of Archaeology & Historic Preservation 1300 Broadway, Denver, CO 80203 (303) 866-3395 432 W. Francis f~k~ f*-:==--- - "~~lhE~ Q 4,48<. 7%464% u. i l,4./CRSH Njy. 71 -AH 1/;2- 692' 10+9 f . 11 LB=*~i 1 9 Il [1 4 2.r.- 2*~ 2~mt*~~ /~i / -9.1,%67'IL 1, 1 N . / ~4Â»:*tri~ ~1Â«<~ ~~)-~ 3 99 <~ 71 1. 0\4 n u*peoÂ°- s.. - 9-4/ 'Â· ~ 67 +R#- 1 11 + 2 144 rff//22-Znk>-0.-0... . ~:~ 3'~~'95$.rAJi--3~&%:tio.f. :uptÂ« C 14 '411<~.42'{*t.~.1~\\(%..~~~.1\1,4 ktfi~Ar-.44. 4 -~ r ~~ ..9Â¤ti-~~i 4~to/tj~4491Â·4+r-{12 r r A - i ~A uÂ«..~ 616=-< '1 lf-br%*-4Â¥*3 ~\*30Â»Â».1 44Â»44*33Â· ffic \\'Â»Â«j..%1'111\\Â¢. i . 7 1 C.AC~--N,xJ. 15 1, 1 N\ UnÂ«~21 .941%-34.4~>, -- --1 441Â«.. 1 32.fÂ«Â«493 ------~ ' 96 <T#luf~ ~~: -T j , b ft <042~GOLE COURSE -, 4.~-.:.:r>/ 1 6~1 79 1 < .3 \ ~U \*j~:-3Â·Ji Â»4. 191*61-..hi~~ ~~Â»oit~,ijt~1194(~filittjf \In M U 1 34% ~2. 2/14=i:i~Â©~rm@mR) \ 4 0 *0 ~/ ~, t l q o ~2/44#*41 ~ -n I , ~f-%{iÂ«*424-Â«spe40~~1 -'' f 1 h .7, 82 1 45 'D/'cÂ· -i. . ~.@,2.*%:poÂ»*lietf?Â¤7F [~~Â»1~P , j // / l->r, bÂ« 07 t @1 14 tkli ./%.v ;1~â‚¬94 n oven 1 6%99Â»/ D n n ' 4/tp , . 1.10--/ .01 710 rt2Annj ,( {~ .. 1'*fi~''F/ff//f~/4~~~ Sir,u -44-74 4-E.h Un=:4. ~ 2.LA i . .. AX IN. 44 -4Â· . 11 1 Â·'* u ,] F r.'r-* ~ LA-'~d/Â»7/ O ,/- ---- -j=GE ,--~,#2> irÂ«, ~:,--,-Ii %*dy#y~~,44:Â·~ illÂ·,Â·1.32;:~*2~:~F-1-L-.3* lit~~1 ic 1 0 1 101 ~12,1~11.7 :.:~c~.:111(~11 1<Iii j..IMNAILL<(9419%27\fÂ«. 4 Â»11 2- ~1 - 1 My-*MI~\ Ul /. j ~ 1 (:1 ..... 4.14 1 ~t ~\ Â»04Â«71,1 /72) \69*422344 - . 11 ~111 -/ 1 11 ip' lt23Â»43*426Â« \ ....1 1~~rÂ« /-1 19Â»7 . w 1/~ 1 14. 1 1 11!1.4.1 '.; i.,1,21 Li~~ 25Â«Â«r /1 . 'Â· i L#i:~; 9 s)<j>6~j~~(,Â·.~4 /<039- ~ *-- i ~%~I~ - 4/ Â®124 7 -3, Â» All Survey Sites are included within the City of Aspen limits, See Sketch map for identification of specific location and building context Aspen Quadrangle Colorado-Pitkin County 1960, Photo Revised 1987 Scale: 1:24 7.5 Minute Survey /WN GN f - /4 12- 1 MILE SCALE 1:24 000 1 2 0 -1 1 1 1.09' 1 /213 MILS 1000 0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000 7000 FEET 20 MILS ~ 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 .5 0 1 KILOMETER 1 + i--1 --i-+ 1 UTM GRID AND 19E 7 MAGNETIC NORTH CONTOUR INTERVAL 40 FEET DECLINATION AT INTER OF SHEET NATIONAL GEODETIC VERTICAL DATUM OF 1929 4 3419. ~7*' C f.:444 â€¢ .1--'.1-W~ -4.,1~ ti---i /31 'h /9.'4::t, ....% i ..4 44 1,4 'ill X 1 ;4 . 4 r. % 11 1 E Â¢tk=.......I---I.-- , . i , 1 U . . . 1 F Ja.7... .. 9 .fil Â¥q f IfF.2/ S Â· f 1 YL' 'f f -- :(61 Â¥ . i.~%6 NE-1 1 - erÂ¥,1 LE:'11' â€¢â€¢ 1 Â£ . 9.4.,5, .L *~ ,- 1 hliall 4 ' 1*14; ' f 0â‚¬4-te~*::., 4. 2 li -it. 1 1 1 41 ... - ;~lip:,12 21)_ 4 4.: . a ... 4 k>P, 7,4-JmÂ¢ 1 .1 -, W 3, 4- 2%Â· . IA "min'.U-Â· Al'/'93; Â·499*69 iu. le,ft:li.!; a ' 1 4. " 'Â·62,4..Â· r Â·. . 1 Â·42 it:U 4.4 k . 1. , . 1 14' ., 4 y .., 44-, â€¢ I -4 Â·6- I .. .y ~ 1,3' Â· d'.11. -4. r . *946 1% ars/99.-44 2 -I - .:ly ,>Midilli'Al/V,3/1/"b G.J. SCX >07*kid - GRiANDC 21 3'28Â® .,407~ 334-3100 *MIT EMUL 4*ON 90* DOWN STYLE NO. 57-28 '*U Not HISTORIC ARCHITECTURAL BUILDING/STRUCTURE FORM State Site Number: Local Site Number: 432.WF Photo Information: ASP-H-1 & 2 Township 10 South Range 85 West Section 12 USGS Quad Name Aspen Year 1960 X 7.5' 15' Building or Structure Name: Thomas Anson House/I.S. & Julia Estelle Hallett Residence Full Street Address: 432 West Francis Legal Description: Lots K, L & M, Block 34 City and Townsite of Aspen City Aspen County Pitkin Historic District or Neighborhood Name: West End Owner: Private/State/Federal Owner's Mailing Address: ARCHITECTURAL DESCRIPTION Building Type: Residential Architectural Style: Victorian Miner's Cottage Dimensions: L: x W: = Square Feet: Number of Stories: 2 story Building Plan (Footprint, Shape): Irregular Square Landscaping or Special Setting Features: None Associated Buildings, Features or Objects - Describe Material and Function (map number / name): 2nd story garage addition at northwest corner For the following categories include materials, techniques and styles in the description as appropriate: Roof: L-shaped qable with secondary gable projecting at east side of front facade; 2nd story east-west gable at rear; all wood shingles Walls: Clapboard with decorative wood shingles at qable ends Foundation / Basement: Red stone Chimney(s): Red brick with corbeled top at center of 2-story gable Windows: One-over-one double hung simple wood lintel-typical; paired one-over-one double hung in front; awning attic vent in front cable end Doors: Transom over segmented 1/2 light over wood panel Porches: Shed; standing seam metal roof wraps front and west side, logging to follow building plan; open; roof supported by square built up posts with decorative brackets General Architectural Description: 1-1/2 story Victorian cottace with 2nd story addition at side and rear. The architectural significance of this structure is not only that it contains typical details of an Aspen Victorian Miner' s Cottage (front gable with cross gable, both steep pitched; long, narrow double-hung windows; horizontal clapboard siding, etc.1, but that it originally was a log cabin which changed its detailing as the mining community flourished. Page 2 of 2 State Site Number Local Site Number 432.WF FUNCTION ARCHITECTURAL HISTORY Current Use: Residential Architect: Unknown Original Use: Residential Builder: Unknown Intermediate Use: Residential Construction Date: 1885-86 Actual X Estimate _ Assessor Based On: MODIFICATIONS AND/OR ADDITIONS Minor Moderate - Major X Moved Date Describe Modifications and Date: Original detailing: posts, brackets replaced Additions and Date: 1 story addition on west side, 2 story addition on rear with 1st story added to rear of that NATIONAL/STATE REGISTER ELIGIBILITY AND CRITERIA Is listed on National Register; State Register Is eligible for National Register; State Register Meets National Register Criteria: A B C D E - Map Key Local Rating and Landmark Designation 1-6 Significant: Listed on or is eligible for National Register Contributing: Resource has maintained historic or 1-1 - architectural integrity. o Supporting: Original integrity lost due to alterations, however, is "retrievable" with substantial effort. Locally Designated Landmark Justify Assessment: Associated Contexts and Historical Information: This residential structure was originally built for Thomas Anson around 1885-86 as a log cabin/house. The presence of the log cabin were found by Richard and Margaret Durrance during remodeling of the inside. The structure was deeded to S.I. and Julia Estelle Hallett in 1887 with the Hallett heirs selling the property in 1935 some 48 years later. S.I. Hallett held various positions within the Aspen communitv in the 1880's and 1890's. He was superintendent of the Smuggler Mine, Asven Sampling Works and the Smuggler Concentrator. He was also the cashier of The Compromise Mining Companv, of the Durant Mine and the Conamora Mine. Other Recording Information Specific References to the Structure/Building: Pitkin County Court- house Records; Sanborn and Sons Insurance Maps Archaeological Potential: N (Y or N) Justify: Recorded By: Date: January 1991 Affiliation: Aspen Historic Preservation Committee - City of Asnen Project Manager: Roxanne Eflin, Historic Preservation Officer/Planner 41Â«57 c 4.- 1 L- X f 003Â·0 91. 6/4\U 6,G.L-1 if /-1 Â«4 I f 1 ' 1 A j 1\ 1 r 4/1 1 A + "f.-/Pe *r I : 1 F, 1 44 2 9\ f - 0- 14 1 1. 0 + .-/-/4-P : -2:'.W--*C-, ------w- x *37-- 1 1 X r -x . ,- -~ , j '+ 4 \-1 4 : - 1 2 , 1 â‚¬ X i LI * h 4- 31 : , h 42 0 \ A 47 7// ' t. ': , AL' . x 7895.4 \Al. F- RAM QiÂ· 11#49 3 A 1 4 ' WEST END 41. 6410_22 3 MUU GLEH mer --N- j i - -0 --I ----- J-4-~,6-,~t >6 " 1 : I\~ '\ ffi \\\ 1 I ' : 11 1 1 5 4 A i {\ 1 1 ~ i ..1 1 Â¢ 4 'No % 2 x 7889= LiLI 2 4~. :if 1 L i = I 1 -4. 1 , ~1Â« a (c -h $ Eff .. r h.' I -i '/ 1. â€¢ IZ ---ci .6----1 :* 1 1 2 C *4 : 1 \126 ..... 87 0 43Â·2- 1- \ , ~Â·.4 G ; 1 ' . 4 \ v C : ----7 AX 9..... t. rk . : IND- - J 3- .-- 1 1 N f> . .-1 ... .4.4 .,*--1 x 78954 \\ i i \Al. FRAM 66 lun03) : COLORADO CULTURAL RESOURCE SURVEY -Preservation Office, 1300 Broodway., Denver. 90 80203 INVENTORY RECORD: ' NOT FOR FIELD USE DET. ELIG. j i AKE. il,1 IMPORTANT: COMP.LETE IRIS SHEET FOR EACH - DET.. NOT ELIG. 1 )-27.~ (1 RESOURCE PLUS' EITHER AN ARCHAEOLOGICAL OR NOMINATED :. 4-ru ' I 1 HISTORICAL/*RCHITECTURAL COMPONENT FORM. LISTED, DATE , i 2/ il , 11-ils.6-#.. I. IDENT.IFICA.T.,IO~i: 1][Resou:ce No.. 5PT-262 2) Tern? . No. 64. 1 3)Resource Name Thomas; Anson -Â· 4}Project. Name ASPEN INVENT.ORY OF HISTORIC SITES/ STRUCTURES 5>Catego.ry: Arch. Site--, Hist./Archie. StructurÂ¢~L, Hist. /Arthic. District-. 6)(For Arch. site')Â·In a District:yes no*;:Tame N/A II.. LOCATION: 7)Township 105 ;Range 85'.1 ; :- T of -- 15 of -- 4 of' SE k of Section 12 ; p.x. 6 . 8)County Pi tkin 9)USGS QUAD Aspen : 7.5 + 15 ;Datia 1960 Attach photecepy - portion of Quad: Clearly show site. 10)Other maps, 1-50' scale Coover Aerial Approx. 90 ft. x 100: ft. 9,000 sq. ft. sqÂ·.m.(+4047=) less thdn 1 acres 11)Dimensions InX m 12)Area 13)UTM Reference:: (CneÂ· UT>[ centered on resource may be given fo: resource under 10 acres.) A.11' 4 1;1:3.14,2130,8 ,0 ImE;14Â·, 313,918,2,2 ImN-2 8.11~31:1314,213-,6,0 lmE;14 ,313. .9 1.7 ,5.,0 ImN. C.11,3 1;1:3' 1:4 ;212,7 FOImE..44,313,917 i 8,>01=N. D.11 ..31,!3 M t212,9,9 SE;14 0 13 ,9 |8,5,0 ImN. Address 432 W. Francis Street LorKLMBIock 34.Addition -- III. MANAGEMENT DATA: 15)Field Assessment: Eligible Not Eligible Need Data -. I- 16>owner/Address M/A 17*ov' t Involvement:, County-State-Federal-Ptivate,_:' Agency N/A 18)Disturbance:none_light-poderate_heavy-total_; ExpIaÂ·in N/A 19}Threats to Resource:Water Erosion-Wind Erosion__Animall Activity_Neglect-Vindalism- Recreation_Construction-;Comments. . fl/A 20)Hanagement Recorcnendaticns Folilow Design Guide:l ines , V. REFERENCE:.21)Stace/Fad. Permit Nos. ?f/A Col'orado Preservation Office 22)PhotoÂ· Nos.. 64 , ac* file at (3031 839-3394 1 1 eport Title ASPEN, INVENTORY OF HISTORIC SLTES/STRUCTURES 24.)Recorder Vera G. Ki rkoatrick 25)Recordin:g Date Sept. 30, 1980 26)Recorder Affilfiation Aspen/Pitkin County Planni'ng,' Office 27>Phone so. (303) 925-2020 1 I . 1 cOEADO CULTURAL RESOURCE SURVEY Colorado Preservacion Office 1300 Broadway, Denverâ€ž CO 30203 - ARCHITECTUB':r/HISTORICAL. CiP[PONENT 20?31 IMPORTANT~.: USE IN CONJUNCTION WITH THE GREEN INVENTORY RECORD FORM EOR FOR RECORDING HISTORIC STRUCTURES AND DISTRICTS. USE SEPARATELY FOR RECORDING STRUCTURES LOCATED WITHIN DISTRICT BOONÂ·DARIES. Thomas Anson House/ r) Resource No. 5PT-262 20 TempÂ· No. 64 3) Name Â·I.S. & Julia Estelle Hallett How;e 4) Address 432 West Francis Street: -31 District Name none I. .INTEGRITYF 6) Condition: Good * Fair Deteriorated 7) Original Use Residence: 81 Present Use Residence 97 Original Stte * Moved Date(sl ef MoveÂ·: N /At t , 10) Unaltered .Utered Explain: This structure was ori-gi:Rally a log house. with t r additions and alterations made to reflect its present VictorianÂ· style. II. DESCRIPTION) 11-1 Building Materials Wood 121 Construction Date circa 1'885-6 131 Archic'ecttauilder unknown , 14D Architectural StyleCs) Loq/Victorian 15) Special Eeatures/Surroundings: NAA. - 1 16) Archaeological Roteitial: Yes No Unknown * Explain: III:. CULTURAL ACTIVITIES:. Key the resource type (ie: house, barn, shed, school, church, etc) to the cultural activity theme and sub-theme category associated with it. 17) THEME . Residential | IS) SUB-THEME Urban 19) TYPES, Single-family . IlqVIZ;tlttCOZNM DA.911 roRM ' 15 form in to be used in connection with both the correction or and. iâ€ž .lition to entries for the Colorado Inventory of Historic Structures and Sites. Explanations are attached. NAME OF BUILDING OR SITE: S. I. HALLETT HOUSE COUNTY (if more than one, list all): PITKIN COUNTY Â¥ LOCATION (street address, if city or town; distance and direction from highway. river, crossing, or other reference point, if rural): 432 WEST ,FRANCIS . 717Â»: . COTOID.A..DC) BLo~_ 34 1,0-rs KL . CONDITION (check and comment wnere aupronriate) : ENCLOSE E - T~-reTS 4. Occupied Threatened Unsound Unoccupied Vandalized Ruins Additions . FT- Sound -27 Intact. Irâ€¢-/ Needs Attention A Alterations Moved from I-. original wi 1-= 1 r Comments: OWNERSHIP (check appropriate): Federal State County 41..&---'ll'/ ..-0.-.1.- Municipal x Private Mixed, show In a National Park combination ' HISTORY (Why is it significant?) e BUILT - Â¥ - - 1888 Date or Slgniricance: Architect: BUILT IN 1888, THIS RESIDENCE WAS ORIGINALLY OWNED BY S. I. HALLET WHOSE VARIOUS POSITIONS IN ASPEN INCLUDED SUPERINTENDENT OF THE SMUGGLER MINE, ASPEN SAMPLING WORKS AND SMUGGLER CONCENTRATOR, CASHIER OF THE COMPROMISE MINING COMPANY, OF THE DURANT MINE, AND THE CONAMORA MINE. I I RATE SIGNIFICANCE: Local State National Event Group or Person Cu.1. turn 1 Heritage - :912 1 r-:,2-3 -. e Â·rrâ€¢*Â¥1?l %3> iÂ¥Â¥r, tâ€¢ .. Â» 111 ix . -~TIic>U.. AL> A+4â‚¬6otJ ~-EX,2~2>â‚¬ ASPEN HISTORIC SITES/STRUCTURES INVENTORY ~ 1980 34~KL 432 94. PipÂ»,-01.-t 6 51-0 BLOCK/LOT(s) ADDRESS INSTRUMENT/DATE GRANTOR GRANTEE YEAR/TAX ASSESSMENT 803 qb*18/0 1Â£M A-5 AlÂ»)00 CA-eetiâ‚¬ 77494Ze.L Â· (94Â© / l /3)#-7 Ge.41 E 131Eea K_ 3. E. 1.~LLâ‚¬ TE 3 St)c> Z- i fr~*rude * 3Â·EE. ~-Juu A EtABile leeÂ© 10Â·~ 3 I 18'7 Oliq. < \UD(bE- 8.2.44Â·ALLE#f7-- 3?op I ~24-1% 5 114Â· 11-err- MEE~ ES (B=tneu~05.- â‚¬ey ~-c,De_ *EED 3 - E M'ALLEFFT- clied Al A 4 14; 1 33 Wp ( ARISE Gee-raune= Ea:ED -theaT~ 40+ :51*u) 4) P 31 20 Â£ 46- bÂ»12, f Roc]+ 61*v) Hm_.5-,3 1440:DE_ thÂ© G~ ILL/~g MaLB._3' DIff)ArDE. R -t, > a-GU, 9 7 0- iC.Mt-AAS>-+MAQ-eARET RESOURCES: 1. Pitkin County Abstract of Lots Books Grantor/GranteeÂ· Books Grantee/Grantor Books 2. Pitkin County Tax Assessment Rolls (on microfilm) RESEARCHER: \la-A- (k â‚¬1 2.Â£-f*rel C, F _ JUL.x~ * â‚¬O CONCLUSIONS: Block 34 Lots KLM 432 West Francis Street 1889 Aspen Street Directory - S.I.Hallett residence , 430 West Francis (now 432 ) Bookkeeper, Compromise Mining Company 1893 Aspen Street Directory - -I.S. Hallett residence - 430 West Francis Magr. Aspen Sampling Works Magr. Aspen Concentrator Superintendent Smuggler Mine Office - Hyman Block 1892 Aspen Street Directory - I.S.Hallett 430 West Francis Mgr. Rust Sampling Works Supt. Smuggler Mine ***** NOTE: Sanborn and Sons Insurance Maps list lot KU4 of Block 34 as 434 West Francis. It does not Show a 430 or a 432. Therefore, the three may be the same but changed over time. fi o MEMORANDUM TO: Aspen Historic Preservation Commission THRU: Joyce Allgaier, Deputy Planning Director~.144 FROM: Amy Guthrie, Historic Preservation Officer RE: 202 S. Garmisch Street, Bishop Residence- Request to Rescind Designation on the "Aspen Inventory of Historic Landmark Sites and Structures," Public Hearing DATE: May 14,2003 SUMMARY: The Bishop Residence, located at 202 S. Garmish Street was included in the first inventory of historic structures completed for Aspen in 1980. Later it was identified as noteworthy again in the 1986 survey, and was formally designated by City Council through Ordinance #4, Series of 1995. The Bishop family participated in the 1994/1995 discussions, expressing their desire to have the property de-listed. The HPC at the time conducted a site visit, discussed the modifications to the house, and reviewed the inventory form, which was prepared under the guidance of a reputable historic preservation consulting firm. That firm recommended against de-listing. The HPC found that de-listing would not be appropriate, citing the reasons that the basic mass, form, and scale of the home was intact. This recommendation was upheld by Council. Since 2000, Community Development Department Staff have overseen the completion of updated inventory forms and a wholesale re-write of the historic preservation ordinance and designation standards. The community expressed a desire to see the decision making process be as objective as possible. To that end, clearer standards that establish historic significance were developed, along with a numerical scoring system which aims to assess the physical integrity of each listed property. Staff has applied the standards and the integrity assessment to 202 S. Garmisch Street and finds that, while the property meets the requirements for degree of antiquity, it achieves only a borderline score for its integrity. Based on the adopted standards, the property attains a score of 44 points, which is below the required total. Staff recommends that the property be removed fi-om the "Aspen Inventory of Historic Sites and Structures." APPLICANT: The Pearl L. Bishop Trust, represented by John Kelly of Oates, Knezevich, and Gardenschwartz and Lisa Purdy of Lisa Purdy Consulting. PARCEL ID:. 2735-124-580-01. 1 ADDRESS: 202 S. Garmisch Street, Lots A and B, Block 68, City and Townsite of Aspen, Colorado. ZONING: R-6, Medium Density Residential. REQUEST TO RESCIND DESIGNATION ON THE ASPEN INVENTORY OF HISTORIC LANDMARK SITES AND STRUCTURES 26.415.030 Designation of Historic Properties The designation of properties to an official list, that is known as the Aspen Inventory of Historic Landmark Sites and Structures which is maintained by the City of Aspen, is intended to provide a systematic public process to determine what buildings, areas and features of the historic built environment are of value to the community. The designation process provides a means of deciding and communicating, in advance of specific issues or conflicts, what properties are in the public interest to protect. A. Establishment of the Aspen Inventory of Historic Landmark Sites and Structures. The Aspen Inventory of Historic Landmarks Sites and Structures has been established by City Council to formally recognize those districts, buildings, structures, sites and obj ects located in Aspen that have special significance to the United States, Colorado or Aspen history, architecture, archaeology, engineering or culture. The location of properties listed on the Inventory are indicated on maps on file with- the Community Development Department. B. Criteria. To be eligible for designation on the Aspen Inventory of Historic Landmark Sites and Structures, an individual building, site, structure or object or a collection of buildings, sites, structures or objects must have a demonstrated quality of significance. The significance of properties will be evaluated according to the following criteria: 1. A property is deemed significant for its antiquity, in that it is: a. More than 100 years old; and b. It possesses an appropriate degree of integrity of location, setting, design, materials, workmanship and association, given its age; gr 2. A property constructed at least forty (40) years prior to the year in which the application for designation is being made that possesses sufficient integrity of location, setting, design, materials, workmanship, and association and is related to one or more of the following: a. An event, pattern or trend that has made a significant contribution to local, state, regional or national history; b. People whose specific contribution to local, state, regional or national history is deemed important and can be identified and documented; 2 c. A physical design that embodies the distinctive characteristics of a type, period or method of construction, or represents the technical or aesthetic achievements of a recognized designer, craftsman or design philosophy that is deemed important. 3. A property that was constructed less than forty (40) years prior to the year in which the application for designation is being made may be considered under subsection 2, above, if the application has been filed by the owner of the property at the time of designation or, when designating a historic district, the majority of the contributing resources in the district meet the forty (40) year age criterion described above. 4. The Commission shall adopt, maintain, and make available to the public guidelines, score sheets, and other devices to apply the criteria set forth in this Section to potentially eligible buildings, sites, structures or objects, or collections thereof. Staff Response: The goal of this process is to evaluate the application to determine if sufficient evidence exists that the property no longer meets the criteria for designation, as purported by the applicant. If that is the case, the property shall be removed from the Inventory, otherwise it shall be retained on the list. HPC's determination will be forwarded as a recommendation to City Council, who has the final decision. This property was constructed in 1888 according to the Pitkin County Assessor's Office. It clearly meets the first standard for designation, Section 26.415.030.B.1.a, Demonstration of Antiquity. Over the last few months, Staff has completed site visits and an initial integrity assessment score for all of the 19th century miner's cottages in Aspen to address the second standard for designation, Section 26.415.030.B.1.b, Demonstration of Integrity. While the Land Use Code does not state a specific threshold score that must be attained, it was generally understood when the scoring forms were created that a minimum score of 50 points was required. Staff provided the applicant with a preliminary score at their request in January 2003. The score provided was 52 points, which has since been revised downward to 49 points. To assist in the review of this application, old photographs and some history of the property have been provided by the owner. Staff has reviewed City building permit records and found record of the installation of aluminum siding (no year or detailed information provided) and a bedroom addition in 1958. Staff has attached architectural inventory forms completed by the City in 1991 and 2000. The original form, from 1980, does not appear to have been filled out in any meaningful way and is not included in this packet. 3 One of HPC's most useful tools are the 1904 Sanborne maps. 202 S. Garmisch is shown below in comparison to a current footprint of the house (existing additions cross-hatched) and the 1893 Bird's Eye View of Aspen. :01 10 3 10. .... V*-3 i DA:Mitifir,vht 2 . ALi . * *.Q 0'-7, LlyÂ¥ 45?imi'.61;'71*42:,fl 3-1- .~ " : C, ~Â·â€¢ ~.Â·1'6'~'t ~ A ' W 1, F*,#M W$,d< 456*4 : f -t- 4. . 4-1.- tb..2 2 . --4 I '31Â£ t.Â·alÂ· E..A?OÂ·-4. 20 Â»ther, 44'\. 40*G 1..*a.* i,Ay: <b.2446/JVA# 2 & 14) 2.- i 'VÂ«4114*4 4 .4. Â· ; 240 4...e bd-ff ti'*~.37144%45,(2.â‚¬7~ â€¢al-*.A Â· r.m 9.- . 4-ek,t i Dbd?t**f~.444**~ , 1 91%142% UhaLÂ£:21Â£ 24.15* 1 1904 Current 1893 HPC may recommend approval or disapproval of this application, or a continuance to request additional information necessary to make a decision. The board may choose to accept the integrity analysis provided by staff or the applicant's representative, or formulate its own rating for the property. Both Staff and HPC have conducted site visits to the property in the recent past, and will do so again in preparation for this meeting. A full explanation of the staff evaluation is provided in "Exhibit A." After further consideration of the current character of this property, staff has reduced the preliminary score and now recommends de-listing, with some reservations. 202 S. Garmisch Street has seen a number of physical alterations, which is not surprising for a building of this age. Our previous analysis of the integrity of this structure was completed during a period in early 2003 when the same study was undertaken for the over one hundred (100) miner' s cottages remaining in Aspen. Community Development Staff has the benefit of understanding the status of this group of resources as a whole to a greater degree than the applicant may, and has considered the alterations at 202 S. Garmisch Street in comparison to that body of research. We find the building to have more merit as a historic resource, more potential for restoration, and more benefits with landmark status than apparently the owner or their representatives do, but 202 S. Garmisch is nonetheless not satisfying the current requirements for designation. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that 202 S. Garmish be de-listed from the "Aspen Inventory of Historic Sites and Structures." 4 One of HPC's most useful tools are the 1904 Sanborne maps. 202 S. Garmisch is shown below in comparison to a current footprint of the house (existing additions cross-hatched) and the 1893 Bird's Eye View of Aspen. 41*Of /0 3 /0 -,4. -1 9 \41 1 1/ i lEn ~- DÂ· 1 1 1 I 1. I '11 :1. C / 21 XI { -1 20 \4 i I 1904 Current 1893 HPC may recommend approval or disapproval of this application. or a continuance to request additional information necessary to make a decision. The board may choose to accept the integrity analysis provided by staff or the applicant's representative. or formulate its own rating for the property. Both Staff and HPC have conducted site visits to the property in the recent past, and will do so again in preparation for this meeting. A full explanation of the staff evaluation is provided in "Exhibit A." After further consideration of the current character of this property, staff has reduced the preliminary score and now recommends de-listing. with some reservations. 202 S. Garmisch Street has seen a number of physical alterations, which is not surprising for a building of this age. Our previous analysis of the integrity of this structure was completed during a period in early 2003 when the same study was undertaken for the over one hundred (100) miner's cottages remaining in Aspen. Community Development Staff has the benefit of understanding the status of this group of resources as a whole to a greater degree than the applicant may, and has considered the alterations at 202 S. Garmisch Street in comparison to that body of research. We find the building to have more merit as a historic resource, more potential for restoration, and more benefits with landmark status than apparently the owner or their representatives do, but 202 S. Garmisch is nonetheless not satisfying the current requirements for designation. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that 202 S. Garmish be de-listed from the "Aspen Inventory of Historic Sites and Structures." 4 RECOMMENDED MOTION: "I move to approve Resolution # , Series of 2003. recommending Council de-list 202 S. Garmisch Street fom the Inventory of Historic Landmark Sites and Structures." Exhibits: A. 'Â·'Integrity Assessment-19th Century Miner' s Cottage" (Staff recommendation) B. Historic Architectural Survey Form, 2000 C. Historic Architectural Building/Structures Form, 1990 D. Application 5 EXHIBIT A INTEGRITY ASSESSMENT- 19 TH CENTURY MINER'S COTTAGE Integrity is the ability of a property to convey its signifcance. â€¢ LOCATION Location is the place where the historic property was constructed or the place where the historic event occurred. 5- The structure is in its original location. 4- The structure has been moved within the original site but still maintains the original alignment and proximity to the street. 3- The structure has been moved to another site, still within the historic Aspen townsite. 0- The structure has been moved to a location which is dissimilar to the original site. Staff Response: 5 points are merited. This structure is in its original location. TOTAL POINTS (maximum of 5) = 5 â€¢ DESIGN Design is the combination of elements that create the form, plan, space, structure, and style Of a property. (Several criteria make up this standard and comprise a total of 50 possible points.) BUILDING FORM 10- The original plan form, based on Sanborne maps or other authenticating documentation, is unaltered and there are no recent additions. 8- The structure has been expanded but the original plan form is intact and the addition(s) would meet the design guidelines. 6- The plan form has been more altered, but the addition would meet the design guidelines. 4- The structure has been expanded in a less desirable manner, but if the addition were removed, at least 50% ofthe building's original walls would remain. 2- The structure has been expanded and the addition overwhelms the original structure , destroying more than 50% of the building's original walls. 0- Two historic structures have been linked together and the original character of the individual structures is significantly affected. Staff Response: 6 points are merited. The footprint of the house as it exists under the primary, north-south oriented gable roof, is essentially intact. There is an addition directly behind it, which is slightly lower in height and handled in exactly 1 RESOLUTION OF THE ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION RECOMMENDING TO CITY COUNCIL THAT 202 S. GARMISCH STREET, THE BISHOP RESIDENCE, BE DE-LISTED FROM THE ASPEN INVENTORY OF HISTORIC LANDMARK SITES AND STRUCTURES RESOLUTION NO. , SERIES OF 2003 Parcel ID #: 2735-124-580-01 WHEREAS, the applicants, The Pearl L. Bishop Trust, have requested that the historic designation on their property at 202 S. Garmisch Street be rescinded and that the property be removed from the Aspen Inventory of Historic Landmark Sites and Structures. The property is located at Lots A and B, Block 68, City and Townsite of Aspen, Colorado; and WHEREAS, Section 26.415.050 of the Aspen Municipal Code establishes the process for Rescinding Designation and states that an application for the removal of a property from the Aspen Inventory of Historic Landmark Sites and Structures shall follow the same submission requirements and review procedures as for designation except that with respect to Section 26.415.030(C)(4) an explanation shall be provided describing why the property no longer meets the criteria for designation . The Historic Preservation Commission and City Council shall determine if sufficient evidence exists that the property no longer meets the criteria for designation and, if so, shall remove the property from the Inventory; and WHEREAS, Historic Preservation Staff, in a report dated May 14, 2003 performed an analysis of the application based on the standards, and using the guidelines, score sheets, and other tools established through Section 26.415.030.B.4 of the Aspen Municipal Code in order to apply the criteria set forth in this Section to potentially eligible buildings, sites, structures or objects, or collections thereof has recommended that the property be de-listed from the Aspen Inventory of Historic Landmark Sites and Structures; and WHEREAS, at a regular meeting held on May 14, 2003, the Historic Preservation Commission considered the application, found the property did not meet the standards for designation and recommended to City Council that 202 S. Garmisch Street be de-listed from the Aspen Inventory of Historic Landmark Sites and Structures by a vote of_ to _ THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED: That the HPC recommends to City Council that 202 S. Garmisch Street, Lots A and B, Block 68, City and Townsite of Aspen, Colorado be de-listed from the Aspen Inventory of Historic Landmark Sites and Structures. â€¢ ASSOCIATION Association is the direct link between an important historic event or person and a historic property. 5- The property would be generally recognizable to a person who lived in th Aspen in the 19 century. TOTAL POINTS (maximum of 5) = 0 points are merited. However, the overall shape and scale of the building are still understandable. â€¢ BONUS POINTS UNIQUE EXAMPLE 5-The design of the building is unique or one of a small group among the miner's cottages. (i.e.It has Italianate or Second Empire detailing.) OUTBUILDINGS 5-There are outbuildings on the property that were built during the same period as the house. MASONRY 5-Original brick chimneys and/or a stone foundation remains. PATINA/CHARACTER 5-The materials have been allowed to acquire the character of age and are obviously weathered. Staff Response: 5 points are merited for the sandstone foundation that remains around the front of the old house and the brick chimney. TOTAL SCORE BY STAFF= 44 (including 6 points for the assumption that original clapboards still exist on the house.) MAXIMUM NUMBER OF POINTS= 100 (and up to 20 bonus points) MINIMUM THRESHOLD FOR DESIGNATION= 50 POINTS Note: Each area o f the integrity analysis includes a description o f the circumstances that might be found and a point assignment. However the reviewer may choose another number within the point range to more accurately reflect the specific property. 6 this, where the property is close to the threshold score, having this question answered definitively could become very important. DOORS AND WINDOWS 10- All or most of the original door and window units are intact. 8- Some window and door units have been replaced, but with generally accurate reconstructions of the originals. 6- Most of the original windows have been replaced, but with generally accurate reconstructions of the originals. 0- Windows and/or doors units have been replaced with inappropriate patterns or styles. Staff Response: 0 points are merited. There is one important bay window left, however, the other windows have been replaced with ones that are not appropriate to the period. TOTAL POINTS (maximum of 20) =6 â€¢ WORKMANSHIP Workmanship is the physical evidence Of the crafts Of a particular culture or people during any given period in history or prehistory. DETAILING AND ORNAMENTATION 5- The original detailing is intact. 3 - Detailing is discernible such that it contributes to an understanding o f its stylistic category. 0- New detailing has been added that confuses the character of the original structure. 0- The detailing is gone. Staff Response: 0 points are merited. The detailing is gone. FINISHES 5- All exterior woodwork is painted and masonry unpainted. 4- All exterior woodwork is painted and masonry is painted. 3- Wood surfaces are stained or modern in appearance but masonry is unpainted. 1- Wood surfaces are stained or modern in appearance and the masonry is painted. Staff Response: 4 points are merited. All wood surfaces on the building are painted, and the original sandstone foundation is painted. TOTAL POINTS (maximum of 10) = 4 5 â€¢ SETTING Setting is the physical environment of a historic property. PROXIMITY TO SIMILAR STRUCTURES 5- The structure is one of a set (at least three) of buildings from the same period in the immediate area. 3- The building is part of a neighborhood that has numerous remaining buildings from the same period. 0- The building is an isolated example from the period. Staff Response: 3 points are merited. There is one Victorian to the east of this house, and a high concentration of historic resources a couple of blocks to the west. HISTORIC LANDSCAPE FEATURES 5- A number of elements of the original landscape are in place, including historic fences, walkways, plant materials and trees, and ditches. 3 - Few or no elements o f the original landscape are present, but the current landscape supports the historic character of the home. 0- The current landscape significantly obscures views ofthe structure. Staff Response: 2 points are merited. Lilaes on the property are typical of the plantings that occurred around miner's cottages. The cottonwood street trees have been replaced with spruce, which do cut down on some views of the building. However, there is still a buffer of space around the house and the trees do not obscure the structure anywhere near the degree that this has occurred on some other properties in town, therefore Staff finds that no further deduction in points is warranted. TOTAL POINTS (maximum of 10) = 5 â€¢ MATERIALS Materials are the physical elements that were combined or deposited during a particular period of time and in a particular pattern or contiguration to form a historic property. EXTERIOR WOODWORK 10- Most of the original woodwork, including clapboard siding, decorative shingles in gable ends, trim, fascia boards, etc. remain. 6- Original siding has been replaced, but trim and other elements remain. 6- Original siding is intact but trim or other elements have been replaced. 0- All exterior materials have been removed and replaced. Staff Response: This question is difficult to answer without removing some of the existing materials on the building. It is very possible that original clapboards exist beneath the layers of aluminum and asphalt shingles that have since been used to side the house. For that reason, Staff is assigning a score of 6 points. In cases like 4 Staff Response: 5 points are merited. This is the category where 202 S. Garmisch Street may be at its strongest in terms of representing its mining era heritage. It is absolutely possible to perceive the original scale of the building. There are no significant additions. FRONT PORCH 10- The front porch is not enclosed and original decorative woodwork remains, or if there was no porch historically, none has been added. 8- The front porch is enclosed but maintains an open character and some original materials. 6- The front porch is not original, but has been built in an accurate manner, per the design guidelines. 2- The front porch has been enclosed and most original materials are gone. 0- The front porch is completely gone or replaced with a porch which would not meet the design guidelines. Staff Response: 0 points are merited. The front porch has been demolished. DOORS AND WINDOWS 10- The typical door and window pattern on the original house is intact- two doors off the front porch, large double hung windows in gable ends, and tall, narrow double hung windows placed "sparsely" on building walls. 8- Less than 50% of the door and window openings on the original building are new and the original door and window openings are intact. 2- More than 50% of the door and window openings on the original building are new and/or some of the original opening sizes have been altered. 0- Most or all of the original door and window openings have been altered. Staff Response: 1 point is merited. There is a significant bay window still intact on the west gable. One other window on the east side of the house may be original. SIMPLICITY OF DESIGN 5- The overall sense of "modesty" in design and detailing on the original structure is intact. 0- New, non-historic trim and other decoration have been added to the building and have altered its character. Staff Response: 0 points are merited. All of the original trim appears to have been removed. The house is stripped of detail. TOTAL POINTS (maximum of 50) = 19 C.3 the manner that additions to this type of building have traditionally been made. Another addition hangs off the east side of the main gable. It is small, is placed towards the back of the structure, and is clearly an addition to the original form. On the west side, the cross gable has been sandwiched by two small shed additions, one of which is within the approximate footprint of an original porch. This southern addition, with its overframed roof, which will be discussed later, is a very typical area where additions were made to many of the local miner's cottages. The front porch that existed historically on the house is gone. That loss, and the shed roofed addition that occurred on the north side of the west cross gable, are the troubling areas that have caused points to drop. By Staff's calculations, just over 50% of the original walls are still revealed on the exterior of the building. None of the additions overwhelm the size of the historic cottage. ROOF FORM 10- The original roof form and the original porch roof, if one existed, are unaltered. 8- The original main roof is intact but the porch roof, if one existed, has been altered. 6- Dormers have been added to the structure or additions have been made that alter the roof form, but the changes would meet the design guidelines. 2- Alterations to the roof have been made in a less sensitive manner, not in conformance with the design guidelines. 0- Less than 50% of the original roof form remains. Staff Response: 7 points are merited. The original cross gable roof still exists. There has been an alteration on the south side of the west gable, however, it is entirely possible that the original roof rafters are present beneath the overframing. Again, this kind of modification is fairly common on the miner's cottages. Staff does not find that additional mark down of points is appropriate. SCALE 5- The original one story scale of the building, and its character as a small cottage is intact. 4- The building has been expanded, but the ability to perceive the original size of the 3 or 4 room home, is preserved. 3- The building has been expanded and the scale ofthe original portion is discernible. 0- The scale of the building has been negatively affected by a large addition, whose features do not reflect the scale or proportions of the historic structure. 2 APPROVED BY THE COMMISSION at its regular meeting on the 14th day of May 2003. Approved as to Form: David Hoefer, Assistant City Attorney Approved as to Content: HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION Jeffrey Halferty, Chair ATTEST: Kathy Strickland, Chief Deputy Clerk Ot,HP1403 Official eligibility determination Re-v. 9/96 (OAHP use only) Date Indials COLORADO CULTURAL RESOURCE SURVEY Determined Eligible- NR Determined Not Eligible- NR Determined Eligible- SR Architectural Inventory Form Determined Not Eligible- SR (page 1 of 4) Need Data Contributes to eligible NR District Noncontributing to eligible NR District 1. IDENTIFICATION 1. Resource number: 5PT. 165 2. Temporary resource number: 101.EHO (101.EH) 3. County: Pitkin 4. City: Aspen 5. Historic building name: 6. Current building name: 7. Building address: 101 East Hopkins Ave. Aspen, Colorado 81611 aka 202 S. Garmisch 8. Owner name and address: Albert & Pearl Bishop 202 South Garmisch Aspen, CO 81611 11. Geographic Information 9. P.M. 6 Township 10 South Range 85 West NE 1/4 of SE 1/4 of SE 1/4 of SE 44 of Section 12 10. UTM reference Zone 13;342625mE433929 0 mN 11. USGS quad name: Aspen Quadrangle Year: 1960, Photo Rev. 1987 Map scale: 7.5' X 15' Attach photo copy of appropriate map section. 12. Lot(s): A&B Block: 68 Addition: Year of Addition: 13. Boundary Description and Justification: Site is comprised of Lots A & B: Block 68 of the Citv and Townsite of Aspen. Assessors office Record Number: 2735-124-58-001 This descriotion was chosen as the most specific and customarv description of the site. 111. Architectural Description 14. Building plan (footprint, shape): Irregular 15. Dimensions in feet: Length x Width 16. Number of stories: One Storv 17. Primary external wall material(s) (enter no more than two): Aluminum Siding 18. Roof configuration: (enter no more than one): Gable Roof 19. Primary external roof material (enter no more than one): Asphalt Roof 20. Special features (enter all that apply): Resource Number: 5PT. 165 Temporary Resource Number: 101.EHO Architectural Inventory Form (page 2 of 2) 21. General architectural description: A single story wood frame Miner's Cottaqe, on a stone foundation. A front qable faces the street (north) with a single fixed pane of glass as the principal window. A cross qable extends to the west, small non-traditional windows are located on the inside of the eli. The west gable is asvmmetrical with a short shed roof extending back to the north and a longer pitch to the south off the back. A shallow hipped roof bav with sill supported bv brackets, sits on the centerline of the aable, a door with short side lights sits at the south corner of the qable. Another qable form extends off the south side of the structure, with a shed roof form extending to the east. 22. Architectural style/building type: Late Victorian 23. Landscaping or special setting features: Relatively open site with a single large spruce at the rear of the site. Several large shrub masses are distributed on the site 24. Associated buildings, features, or objects: none IV. Architectural History 25. Date of Construction: Estimate 1880's Actual Source of information: Based on building style 26. Architect: Unknown Source of information: 27. BuildedContractor: Unknown Source of information: 28. Original owner: Unknown Source of information: 29. Construction history (include description and dates of major additions, alterations, or demolitions): Significant alterations: replaced sidinq, windows, roofinq, single storv shed addition on southeast: dates unknown, all pre-1990 30. Original location X Moved Date of move(s): V. Historical Associations 31. Original use(s): Domestic 32. Intermediate use(s): 33. Current use(s): Domestic 34. Site type(s): Residential Neighborhood 35. Historical background: This structure is reoresentative of AsDen's mining era character. The building has the characteristics of typical mining era structures such as: size, simple plan, and front aable / Dorch relationship Resource Number: 5PT.165 Temporary Resource Number: 101.EHO Architectural Inventory Form (page 3 of 3) 36. Sources of information: Pitkin Countv Courthouse records; Sanborn and Sons Insurance Maos: 1990 and 1980 City of Aspen Survey of Historic Sites and Structures VI. Significance 37. Local landmark designation: Yes No X Date of designation: Designating authority: 38. Applicable National Register Criteria: A. Associated with events that have made a significant contribution to the broad pattern of our history; B. Associated with the lives of persons significant in our past; X C. Embodies the distinctive characteristics of a type, period, or method of construction, or represents the work of a master, or that possess high artistic values, or represents a significant and distinguishable entity whose components may lack individual distinction; or D. Has yielded, or may be likely to yield, information important in history or prehistory. Qualifies under Criteria Considerations A through G (see Manual) Does not meet any of the above National Register criteria 39. Area(s) of significance: Architecture 40. Period of significance: Late 1800's Silver Mining Era 41. Level of significance: National State Local X 42. Statement of significance: This structure is significant for its position in the context of Aspen's mining era. It describes the nature of the life of an averaae familv or individual during that period. as well as the construction techniaues. materials available and the fashion of the time. 43. Assessment of historic physical integrity related to significance: Most character defining features have been lost, however additions are minimal: mass and scale are retained. VII. National Register Eligibility Assessment 44. National Register eligibility field assessment: Eligible Not Eligible X Need Data 45. Is there National Register district potential? Yes No X Discuss: If there is National Register district potential, is this building: Contributing Noncontributing 46. If the building is in existing National Register district, is it: Contributing __ Noncontributing Resource Number: 5PT.165 Temporary Resource Number: 101.EHO Architectural Inventory Form (page 4 of 4) Vlll. Recording Information 47. Photograph numbers: R19; F2,3 Negatives filed at: Aspen/Pitkin Community Development Dept. 48. Report title: Citv of Aspen Update of Survey of Historic Sites and Structures, 2000 49. Date(s): 6/29/2000 50. Recorder(s): Suzannah Reid and Patrick Duffield 51. Organization: Reid Architects 52. Address: 412 North Mill Street, PO Box 1303, Aspen CO 81612 53. Phone number(s): 970 920 9225 NOTE: Please attach a sketch map, a photocopy of the USGS quad. map indicating resource location, and photographs. Colorado Historical Society - Office of Archaeology & Historic Preservation 1300 Broadway, Denver, CO 80203 (303) 866-3395 202 S. Garmisch -1 1 1 Afl w=â€¢ r-Â·AL 6- mÂ·â€¢,4 , * Er -=9) 4= 1 63 i LA-- 7-Au ' / 1 1,6 :-1. $ 3 hi ./4 thim:>0- Â· 71 L -d D- 7-4-, 61- 42=.f A al, 4 -- 4 tAb Â«--Â»* -- / -- 4 0-,-I d-M * 04 -*-1 99~~74--~~ 1 -4-91*1 4 -2 i r-~tf-+ j -Xcht drcr 11 7 /4, 07?52239'-, ' 4 \44% 1 - Py Ul VE- -- , 4~1~ 1 1 3 9 1,- 11 1 Jf - .i ,= t. -Â·~74 /2 1 W L Â¤1- -m=:.-1~ 1 1 (41 a. -i .4 "4. â€¢Aâ€¢â€¢././ / 1 N 0,7-2. 1113*25-rp/zs~>..i~-19ARDRAc~LsrWI'ihuÂ«--574 A -A A. - A 4 - fl - T 1 + 1 \ c - 31 j l~ 4 f ..c .r VEÂ»t~'ibil~42Â»6-Â»29':Pir - 6 ix _ Â».- 3 Â£5* 10Â« 4240 C t N. h.1 . . P 1 <\-29.\2 -27\1..\% C r.-ar-. -- - .Â· . - 1 1 \ /, 1 - '' r_3 \,1 7Â«- --7 8%.1 . 1.0/,C -Â· ....Â«.0 I>\2233< 7,/5/.lfa=ki/:D'./P- . il.. A I j R .fh / r. , ' '1 - 95,/ C - --~ .rn - - '' " / L \ I-' I. C~M 1---44Â»14- cro--1 --<CtÂ«jÂ«fi~k~ ' ) 3/-tr }7 - f 'b Al / 2 ~ ~-1 0-4 Â»4Â» - ,Â«40901-11 -- ~Â«1~~ / r// . 13>Â»3.51 r / G - _..01' ..O /4:~7 .2- / ' ' ~xE /79> 'C ... Â¤0\41 -0-1- \2\1 I =======\- \ L /' -)11 \\Â« u ., />=~-vtÂ»* / /,9 --// 0. 7 - U 9/ /944* i~-;4:tÂ·. 5 0Â»-t -Â«f- 4-[ --f~6~.<.146~$8~.':\ <I~4&Â»rffÂ«Â»Â«Â«-~-* 1 1 -/ '01 A / -p:157 - -iÂ» teÂ·- -~223%' * Cil Â·n< (p-' Al) 1 9:e 1.-<4-~/ ftt~=*Mbj#%~$%~*6464,36<16Â» ~6<6k~246' c-fc-f<<wzf~~P5Le \ 4< % .74 9.96 rv u_.9*~pÂ· Â·' ' '7 l Â· ~ //5IE- 54 \ I %\ 11 Â« ./1 -t-f '.J2#2-fLs - --\ / lic//1 '~)GOLF COURSE A:\. 1 emet ry ../ :1 -r-< f j * ~ :ix .--Â«*~4Â« be< crt.ffÂ» --- 21< f.7/; 147/ U 4 0Â«r -1=--4-61 / / -n 3 fir=~ r C , - :*.3 1 0-9 -9,0. /1 @d 1 489?1 9 FAO'*s wac 4 i 6 .. C . j /4 . 11 0\ 4 / . 1 1. 1.- 4224 -4 44<1 :4 -..~4.Â«REIAL:~, j'~ --=.- W HT<Il :f ,'%.-'d // 111Partl.-Reg@41 m \\\\ -7*Jd#JW+Jkff Â·jtflf>:144->Asparb yyl,7 1 \1 \Vt '-7 <3 ft< ... -Â«~ 0 "ft//.:-2. ./.?6.7442.....ll.. 12. N \6M 7 - . ~-Zx~,-r71 4/, -- ''011'TA ..Â·4; '47~ 9/ ' / 49' '0 -1 -Acd#,+4 < R dul.f. .,Â«04---r=o..Â»4 -13*77Â¢ Â·\4ff#Ati:*4'~i~ /9*2 ./ .... Â· liz...Pt==~ . a 4, cÂ»:: Â»u :-Â·.Â·~ ~f::Â·: 4-.tÂ»f.~-Ik'%3'Â«1 f.\~ ' I f -4 Er VTral f 61 .'. 0.3~ y â€¢ / 3.-6 1 4. Â· 2.7--..:D) 94 .49Â·. 1 4 3 -Y -- 1.9 7 L 4 14. f (f %r -a:~694 I â‚¬*,Â· *341Â·Â·Â·12 <; ; .3- iÂ« ffÂ»* , I J 1,09..\11'~p.L lilli '/ t, 1. 4-, -41 41ft<Â« ~,i 7 -4-Ea.01\~12 -fi ---L tj - -%101Â£*7,- ... 1 4414- 11<fl-{ ~(0 -- â€¢.54 t,22.<*ca tert-\ 3 i' 1 1 1 1 a. I h . U .//- \'7Â«- 1 1.C ~119 4'k#it'Liic.. &' I. 7 1 545 1. 2-14*198. \ i.,- .fld:. 3 ..1:.... 1 .4- 4--~1~ . ' in --2- y . , , â‚¬' T , \ >atq... 1 1 -9.-- 4 . 133Â« ,Â·- r Nk:6~- -T--1 - Â· .Â·/.ax=~=-Câ‚¬h,./NE.0./6*74 Â· 1 1. . 11, Â·// \ '\ H Â» -' f IA #i)\ / ji~1363\ ) juu ) UNE \\\ k V %492. 1\ li .n . .1 lâ‚¬R 4 72 E 0 & 4/0 All Survey Sites are included within the City of Aspen limits, Aspen Quadrangle See Sketch map for identification of specific location and building context Colorado-Pitkin County 1960, Photo Revised 1987 Scale: 1:24 7.5 Minute Survey /WN GN ~ SCALE 1:24 000 1 - 0 1 MILE 2 H H H H! 1 1Â°09' $ /213 MILS 1000 0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000 7000 FEET --, 20 MILS ~~ H H H I 1 I 1 1 1 1 2 1 5 0 1 KILOMETER H-Â»-+1 : UTM GRID AND 1987 MAGNETIC NORTH CONTOUR INTERVAL 40 FEET DECLINATION AT Â·CENTER OF SHEET NATIONAL GEODETIC VERTICAL DATUM OF 1929 41 0.3~32~ TE),TON'm#7Â§@11,5% plo. 8OX 007638 â€¢ORLANDO, FL 32860 â€¢ (407} 886-3100 ]NSER-1 EMULSION SIDf DOWN 5TYLE NO. 57Â·2B ARCHIVAL PRESERVERS DATE: ASSIGNMENT: F.LE NO. rf . 4 f 4 5 P .-4/1 44*4 '1 - 3 . SEEZED:a_ .. $- I -*-%1.-I-- * --CZ==:t-./.-...I../ . I /\ .f - 7, - 4.-41 13*4. ~04{134>:Si~arri:ja.bu.-â€ž~:~ pp, 2- ; r -,;Q- c- / 1......4-9 . 1 9.jat.04.-mir 1--: d.01. iii' p-- - 1, e . / - I ....I- . -7. 2 : 7/ -m . r I ' ~Â·6142: 4-1 7-- â€ž I 5/4.,Il -0:44#$.. ,Â¥*4Â«iÂ£~1 ~ .Â· .. -9 4*, 1 le,4.... 1,/S/1 W.. I 1 I. 4 I .A*. +- 1 24 . HISTORIC ARCHITECTURAL BUILDING/STRUCTURE FORM State Site Number: Local Site Number: 101.EH Photo Information: ASP-M-18 Township 10 South Range 85 West Section 12 USGS Quad Name Aspen Year 1960 X 7.5' 15' Building or Structure Name: None Full Street Address: 101 East Hopkins Legal Description: Lots A & B. Block 68 West Aspen Mountain City Aspen County Pitkin Historic District or Neighborhood Name: Shadow Mountain Owner: Private/State/Federal Owner's Mailing Address: ARCHITECTURAL DESCRIPTION Building Type: Residential Architectural Style: Cottage Dimensions: L: X W: = Square Feet: 1,200 Number of Stories: 1-storv Building Plan (Footprint, Shape): T-shaped Landscaping or Special Setting Features: None * Associated Buildings, Features or Objects - Describe Material and Function (map number / name): None For the following categories include materials, techniques and styles in the description as appropriate: Roof: Cross gabled with asymmetrical east-west gable terminating in shed roof on front; wood shakes Walls: Aluminum siding with decorative wood shingles at gable end Foundation / Basement: Stone basement Chimney(s): Brick Windows: Shallow-proiecting bav with shed roof with one-over-one double hung window, supported bv scroll brackets at west side; small square casements; large picture windows on both north and west side of north/south qable Doors: Full light door with two 1/2 height side lights Porches: None General Architectural Description: 1-story Victorian Cottage with shed roof addition. Original fenestration, materials and detailing have been replaced or removed. Page 2 of 2 State Site Number Local Site Number 101.EH FUNCTION ARCHITECTURAL HISTORY Current Use: Residential Architect: Unknown Original Use: Residential Builder: Unknown Intermediate Use: Residential Construction Date: 1880's Actual X Estimate _ Assessor Based On: Building's Style MODIFICATIONS AND/OR ADDITIONS Minor Moderate Major X Moved Date Describe Modifications and Date: Metal sidinq, roof shingles and window changes -- alter character significantly; dates unknown Additions and Date: 1st story shed addition on southeast side; date unknown NATIONAL/STATE REGISTER ELIGIBILITY AND CRITERIA Is listed on National Register; State Register Is eligible for National Register; State Register Meets National Register Criteria: A B CDE Map Key Local Rating and Landmark Designation Significant: Listed on or is eligible for National Register Contributing: Resource has maintained historic or Ll - architectural integrity. 0 Supporting: Original integrity lost due to alterations, however, is "retrievable" with substantial effort. Locally Designated Landmark Justify Assessment: Associated Contexts and Historical Information: The significance of this residential structure is not of those who owned it or lived in it, nor of its architecture. although this structure is representative of Aspen's Mining Era. This structure is of historical importance by illustrating the family/home environment and lifestyle of the average citizen in Aspen which was then dominated bv the silver mining industry. Other Recording Information Specific References to the Structure/Building: Pitkin County Court- house Records; Sanborn and Sons Insurance Maps Archaeological Potential: N (Y or N) Justify: Recorded By: Glenn Rappaport Date: September 1990 Affiliation: Aspen Historic Preservation Committee - City of Aspen Project Manager: Roxanne Eflin, Historic Preservation Officer/Planner Â«m MEMORANDUM TO: Aspen Historic Preservation Commission JAA THRU: Joyce A. Allgaier, Deputy Planning Director FROM: Amy Guthrie, Historic Preservation Officer RE: 21 Meadows Road, Unit 2, Trustee Townhomes At-The-Aspen Meadows- Minor Development- Public Hearing DATE: May 14,2003 SUMMARY: The applicant is requesting exterior changes to Unit 2, one of the Herbert Bayer designed buildings know as the "Trustee Townhomes" at the Aspen Meadows. The entire group is listed on the "Aspen Inventory of Historic Landmark Sites and Structures," and therefore any alterations to them must receive HPC approval and must comply with the "City of Aspen Historic Preservation Design Guidelines" and Aspen Municipal Code. The proposed alterations include adding new windows on the front fagade, eliminating a staircase on the front favade, reconfiguring the entry area, relocating windows on the north and south endwalls, modifying windows on the rear of the unit, and replacing concrete walks and patios. Staff recommends continuation of this application finding that not all of the relevant design guidelines are being met at this time. APPLICANT: Victoria Smith, owner, represented by William Lukes, Architect. PARCEL ID: 2735-122-39-002. ADDRESS: 21 Meadows Road, Unit 2 of the Trustee Town homes At-the-Aspen Meadows, A Condominium, City of Aspen, Pitkin County Colorado. ZONING: Aspen Meadows SPA. MINOR DEVELOPMENT The procedure for a Minor Development Review is as follows. Staff reviews the submittal materials and prepares a report that analyzes the project's conformance with the design guidelines and other applicable Land Use Code Sections. This report is transmitted to the HPC with relevant information on the proposed project and a recommendation to continue, approve, disapprove or approve with conditions and the 1 reasons for the recommendation. The HPC wit! review the application, the staff analysis report and the evidence presented at the hearing to determine the project's conformance with the City of Aspen Historic Preservation Design Guidelines. The HPC may approve, disapprove, approve with conditions, or continue the application to obtain additional information necessary to make a decision to approve or deny. If the application is approved, the HPC shall issue a Certificate of Appropriateness and the Community Development Director shall issue a Development Order. The HPC decision shall be final unless appealed by the applicant or a landowner within three hundred (300) feet of tile subject property in accordance with the procedures set forth in Chapter 26.316. Staff Response: Recently, the HPC has been contemplating new tools to analyze the appropriateness of proposals to alter historic structures. The following questions are likely to be the center of future discussions, and may be helpful for HPC to at least reference for this proj ect (note that the questions do not serve as formal decision making criteria at this time): 1. Why is the property significant? 2. What are the key features of the property? 3. What is the character of the context? How sensitive is the context to changes? 4. How would the proposed work affect the property's integrity assessment score? 5. What is the potential for cumulative alterations that may affect the integrity of the property? Ths townhouse is significant as an example of housing designed by Herbert Bayer, an internationally important artist, and is noteworthy within the context of the campus of the Aspen Institute, known as the Aspen Meadows. Please refer to the attached history about Bayer. According to Heritage.Aspen's website, "Walter Paepcke founded the Aspen Institute in 1950, after the success of the Goethe Bicentennial in Aspen. Originally called The Aspen Institute for Humanistic Studies, the Aspen Institute was loosely structured on the Great Books Seminars at the University of Chicago. The central idea was that participants would come together to study different facets of the humanities in an atmosphere free from the distractions of the city. The summer programs were designed to incorporate intellectual discussions, through classes and lectures, as well as spiritual pursuits through music and festivals. Interest in these programs was so high that the Institute came to include separate entities for music, in the Aspen Music School and Festival, as well as science, in the Aspen Center for Physics." The townhomes were built in 1965-1966 as short term accommodations for individuals associated with the Institute. Each of the 8 units were identical when constructed as simple two story forms with a low pitched roof and an integral carport. Natural wood shakes covered the front and rear facades, and painted white siding was used in the area 2 of the carport and endwalls. Relatively small, mostly vertically oriented windows were used on all elevations. Detailing was spare. Much of the townhomes' significance lies in their character as a group and their relationship to the rest of the Meadows campus, a very important modernist work. They are located very close to the health club, restaurant, and gardens, which are also designated, but have privacy because of their placement along the edge of the campus and the dropping topography in this area. In staffs opinion, the front facades of the units are the area of most concern in terms of historic preservation. The rear of the units, while visible from other areas of town, do not impact one's experience of the campus, and if these units are to be allowed similar expansion or alteration potential as other.designated homes in Aspen, are the least sensitive area for new construction to take place. The townhomes were only added to the historic inventory in the mid 1990's. There have been a number of alterations made to the units before and after that time, particularly at the back. Overall though, they maintain a strong visual relationship to each other. No additions have altered their rooflines, materials and color scheme have been retained. Alterations to windows and doors, as contemplated in this application, do need to be weighed carefully in order not to compromise the integrity of the building to the point that the listing of this group of structures on the inventory could be questioned. The architect has spent a significant amount of time researching Bayer's design and the status of the other units, and has proposed changes that are within the original design a " vocabulary. Prints of the original architectural drawings will be available at the meeting for HPC to review. Staff does have concerns with some of the alterations proposed in this project because, while they would not be architecturally incompatible with the property, they not only add some new features, but remove or relocate others. This conflicts with several design guidelines, namely: 3.2 Preserve the position, - number and arrangement of historic windows in a building wall. o Enclosing a historic window opening in a key character-defining facade is inappropriate, as is adding a new window opening. This is especially important on primary facades where the historic ratio of solid-to-void is a character-defining feature. Greater flexibility in installing new windows may be considered on rear walls. Do not reduce an original opening to accommodate a smaller window or door or increase it to receive a larger window on primary facades. 3.3 Preserve the historic ratio of window openings to solid wall on a facade. o Significantly increasing the amount of glass on a character-defining facade will negatively affect the integrity of a structure. 3 00 And 4.1 Preserve historically significant doors. o Maintain features important to the character of a historic doorway. These may include the door, door frame, screen door, threshold, glass panes, paneling, hardware, detailing, transoms and flanking sidelights. o Do not change the position and function of original front doors and primary entrances. o If a secondary entrance must be sealed shut, any work that is done must be reversible so that the door can be used at a later time, if necessary. Also, keep the door in place, in its historic position. o If the secondary entrance is sealed shut the original entrance on the primary facade must remain operable. The proposal needs to be restudied so that the original door and window locations are retained. New windows can be added in the manner generally suggested, but the original can not be taken away in the meantime. Staff does not have a concern with the enclosure of the mechanical area per se, because it is minimal and will not likely be perceivable from the street. Retaining the door in its current location should be considered though. Staff is very sympathetic to the safety concern with the front staircase. Measures such as installing a simple gate at the top or bottom of them should be discussed before removal is accepted. The rear elevation is an acceptable location for more alterations, and what is currently proposed there is not problematic. The application should be discussed in detail by the HPC, architect, and client, and continued for some restudy. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that Minor Development for 21 Meadows Road, Unit 2 of the Trustee Town Homes At-the-Aspen Meadows, A Condominium, City of Aspen, Pitkin County Colorado, be continued to June 11,2003. RECOMMENDED MOTION: "I move to continue 21 Meadows Road to June 11, 2003." Exhibits: A. Staff memo dated May 14, 2003 B. Relevant Guidelines 4 C. Biography of Herbert Bayer from the Aspen HPC historic context paper entitled "ASPEN'S 2om CENTURY ARCHITECTURE:MODERNISM." D. Application Exhibit B - Relevant Guidelines Walkways 1.9 Maintain the established progression of public-to-private spaces when considering a rehabilitation project. o This includes a sequence of experiences, beginning with the "public" sidewalk, proceeding along a "semi-public" walkway, to a "semi-private" porch or entry feature and ending in the "private" spaces beyond. o Provide a walkway running perpendicular from the street to the front entry. Meandering walkways are discouraged, except where it is needed to avoid a tree. Use paving materials that are similar to those used historically for the building style. Concrete, wood or sandstone may be appropriate for certain building styles. Treatment of Windows 3.1 Preserve the functional and decorative features of a historic window. o Features important to the character of a window include its frame, sash, muntins/mullions, sills, heads, jambs, moldings, operation and groupings of windows. Repair frames and sashes rather than replacing them, whenever conditions permit. Preserve the original glass, when feasible. 2 Preserve the position, number and arrangement of historic windows in a building wall. o Enclosing a historic window opening in a key character-defining facade is inappropriate, as is adding a new window opening. This is especially important on primary facades where the historic ratio of solid-to-void is a character-defining feature. Greater flexibility in installing new windows may be considered on rear walls. Do not reduce an original opening to accommodate a smaller window or door or increase it to receive a larger window on primary facades. Replacement Windows 3.3 Preserve the historic ratio of window openings to solid wall on a facade. o Significantly increasing the amount of glass on a character-defining facade will negatively affect the integrity of a structure. 3.4 Match a replacement window to the original in its design. o If the original is double-hung, then the replacement window should also be double- hung, or at a minimum, appear to be so. Match the replacement also in the number and position of glass panes. o Matching the original design is particularly important on key character-defining facades. 5 00 90 o o 3.5 In a replacement window, use materials that appear similar to the original. o Using the same material as the original is preferred, especially on character-defining facades. However, a substitute material may be considered if the appearance of the window components will match those of the original in dimension, profile and finish. 3.6 Preserve the size and proportion of a historic window opening. o Reducing an original opening to accommodate a smaller window or increasing it to receive a larger window is inappropriate. o Consider reopening and restoring an original window opening where altered. 3.7 Match, as closely as possible, the profile of the sash and its components to that of the original window. o A historic window often has a complex profile. Within the window's easing, the sash steps back to the plane of the glazing (glass) in several increments. These increments, which individually only measure in eighths or quarters of inches, are important details. They distinguish the actual window from the surrounding plane of the wall. Treatment of Doors 4.1 Preserve historically significant doors. o Maintain features important to the character of a historic doorway. These may include the door, door frame, screen door, threshold, glass panes, paneling, hardware, detailing, transoms and flanking sidelights. o Do not change the position and function of original front doors and primary entrances. o If a secondary entrance must be sealed shut, any work that is done must be reversible so that the door can be used at a later time, if necessary. Also, keep the door in place, in its historic position. o If the secondary entrance is sealed shut, the original entrance on the primary facade must remain operable. 4.2 Maintain the original size of a door and its opening. o Altering its size and shape is inappropriate. It should not be widened or raised in height. 4.3 When a historic door is damaged, repair it and maintain its general historic appearance. o For additional information see Chapter 14: General Guidelines "On-Going Maintenance of Historic Properties". Replacement Doors 4.5 When replacing a door, use a design that has an appearance similar to the original door or a door associated with the style of the house. o A replica of the original, if evidence exists, is the preferred replacement. 6 A historic door from a similar building also may be considered. Simple paneled doors were typical. Very ornate doors, including stained or leaded glass, are discouraged, unless photographic evidence can support their use. New Additions (Staff isreferring to the mechanical enclosure as an "addition") 10.3 Design a new addition such that one's ability to interpret the historic character of the primary building is maintained. o A new addition that creates an appearance inconsistent with the historic character of the primary building is inappropriate. 3 An addition that seeks to imply an earlier period than that of the primary building also is inappropriate. 3 An addition that seeks to imply an inaccurate variation of the primary building's historic style should be avoided. o An addition that covers historically significant features is inappropriate. 10.4 Design a new addition to be recognized as a product of its own time. o An addition should be made distinguishable from the historic building, while also remaining visually compatible with these earlier features. o A change in setbacks of the addition from the historic building, a subtle change in material or a differentiation between historic, and more current styles are all techniques that may be considered to help define a change from old to new construction. 10.8 Place an addition at the rear of a building or set it back from the front to minimize the visual impact on the historic structure and to allow the original proportions and character to remain prominent. o Locating an addition at the front of a structure is inappropriate. o Additional floor area may also be located under the building in a basement which will not alter the exterior mass of a building. o Set back an addition from primary facades in order to allow the original proportions and character to remain prominent. A minimum setback of 10 feet on primary structures is recommended. 10.10 Design an addition to a historic structure such that it will not destroy or obscure historically important architectural features. o For example, loss or alteration of architectural details, cornices and eavelines should be avoided. 10.11 On a new addition, use exterior materials that are compatible with the historic materials of the primary building. 3 The new materials should be either similar or subordinate to the original materials. 7 000 Lighting 14.6 Exterior lights should be simple in character and similar in color and intensity to that used traditionally. o The design of a fixture should be simple in form and detail. Exterior lighting must be approved by the HPC. o All exterior light sources should have a low level of luminescence. 14.7 Minimize the visual impacts of site and architectural lighting. Unshielded, high intensity light sources and those which direct light upward will not be permitted. Shield lighting associated with service areas, parking lots and parking structures. Timers or activity switches may be required to prevent unnecessary sources of light by controlling the length of time that exterior lights are in use late at night. Do not wash an entire building facade in light. Avoid placing exposed light fixtures in highly visible locations, such as on the upper walls of buildings. o Avoid duplicating fixtures. For example, do not use two fixtures that light the same area. 14.8 Minimize the visual impact of light spill from a building. o Prevent glare onto adjacent properties by using shielded and focused light sources that direct light onto the ground. The use of downlights, with the bulb fully enclosed within the shade, or step lights which direct light only on to walkways, is strongly encouraged. o Lighting shall be carefully located so as not to shine into residential living space, on or off the property or into public rights-of-way. Mechanical Equipment & Service Areas 14.14 Minimize the visual impacts of service areas as seen from the street. o When it is feasible, screen service areas from view, especially those associated with commercial and multifamily developments. o This includes locations for trash containers and loading docks. o Service areas should be accessed off of the alley, if one exists. 8 0 0 .0 0 0 EXHIBIT C HERBERT BAYER Herbert Bayer (b. 1900- Austria. d. 1985- Santa Barbara, California) was an artist of many disciplines. He apprenticed with architects in his native country Austria. and in Germany. starting at the age of 18. In 1921 he entered the most reknowned art and th design school o f the 20 century, the Bauhaus in Weimar. Germany. E The Bauhaus, which existed from 1919 to 1933. was begun in a spirit of social reform and .f-'r.= represented a rejection of many design ideas that - 07 F . f preceded it. 'From skyscrapers to doorknobs, $-Al>t modern design was born, really. at the Bauhaus. The ideas of the Bauhaus shaped whole cities, changed architecture, modified the nature of furniture design and transformed the essential implements of daily --0 life." 1 Bayer was named the head of the typography workshop at the Bauhaus in 1925 and was ultimately Herbert Bayer one of three masters named by director Walter Gropius, the other two masters being the gifted Josef Albers and Marcel Breuer. In 1928, Bayer left the school and established his own studio iii Berlin, then becoming the art director for Vogue magazine. As Nazism gained strength in Germany. Bayer fled the country and immigrated to New York City in 1938. There, he had his first show with the Museum of Modern Art, and began to work as art director for corporations and ad agencies. By 1946. all of his work was for Walter Paepcke at the Container Corporation of America and Robert O. Anderson at the Atlantic Richfield Corporation, both of whom had an interest in Aspen and the establishment of the Aspen Institute. Walter Paepcke brought Herbert Bayer to Aspen iii 1946 to serve as the design consultant for the Institute. a role in which he served until 1976. Bayer was offered the chance to design a planiied environment, where the goal was total visual integration. On April 1, 1960, Bayer received a license to practice architecture in Colorado, without examination. He had no formal training - 94; in the discipline, so he generally worked in association with another firm, particularly -- -- - - with Fritz Benedict. The Sundeck on Aspen **V~ Mountain (1946, since demolished) was the first of his designs that was ever built. At the Institute, Bayer designed the Seminar Building The Sundeck, 1 946 ~ Beth Dunlop, "Bauhaus' Influence Exceeds It's Life," The Denver Post April 20, 1986. and it' s sgraffito mural ( 1952. the first building on the grounds), Aspen Meadows ~ Guest Chalets (1954. since demolished and reconstructed). Central Building (1954), the ** J 4..C --/OA r --==. Health Center (1955), Grass Mound (1955, ~ J , which pre-dates the earthwork" movement J Â· - M . - i - '-67'Â·fil: in landscape design by 10 years and was one J 2 5.- . . . 1 r Il, Â£,a. P o f the first J â‚¬ 13.- ' . :f 4 497Â·27- 1,1.al- environmental sculptures in the country),the Â· r. , Marble Sculpture Garden (1955). Walter Paepcke Memorial Building (1962). the Institute for Theoretical Physics Building Aspen Institute Seminar Building, 1952 (1962. since demolished), Concert Tent (1964, -f'%.p -Â·M'Zqk removed in 2000). and Anderson Park (c. 1970.) Bayer also led the design for the rehabilitation 1 - of the Wheeler Opera House (1950-1960), ., , -1,1.t~-11 .4- - 41.~Â¤. ./i ,,--44-2 1 1 ~ designed two personal residences on Red Mountain (1950 and 1959), and other homes iii i Aspen including those still in existence at 240 X A-Ve..,1 '41,4-~,rF~~~ Lake Avenue (1957) and 311 North Street (1963). i,~~.,, . ...1. 11 &....:LiMMEN.... ' rm,Â· Â·amt '02:,il .-â€¢ic,4.~ Aspen Meadows Health Center, 1955 The period during which most of *4~Rd; Â· Bayer' s architecture was designed is contined :1 6 9- 4~ to 1946-1965. Important characteristics of his â€¢Â·.Â·-21- - ._*0_2_#kf '.rad_ -t:Â£ buildings were simplicity and the use of basic - geometrical shapes and pared down forms. He was heavily intluenced by Bauhaus and The Marble Sculpture Garden, 1955 International Style principles. Color was an important component to some of his work. and lie often used primary red, blue and yellow graphics. Bayer believed in the concept of designing the total -9Â« 1,1 .1 human environment and that art should be incorporated into MINi 4 2*'Llri;!i~!yE,F. all areas of life. He drew logos and posters for the Aspen Skiing Company, and even designed signs for small Aspen Â· U.. Â·22~n - ..4 - 4 7 businesses. He provided the paint color schemes for certain f~ Victorians that Paepcke's Aspen Company decided should r.*'_01-2*U~21Nf~i,Aft be saved in the 1940's. A strong blue color, known locally i'kit#~f'~ - ---Â·p~ as "Bayer Blue" was one of his selections and can still be 1 17 t Â·+ ._~16*-AL- 7 - - r- --73~ seen on the former Elli's building (101 S. Mill) and other Buyer paint scheme locations in town. His choice of a bright pink for Pioneer Park (442 W. Bleeker) and a bold paint scheme that once existed on the Hotel Jerome will also be remembered. Buyer spent 28 years living in Aspen and was one of the first artists to make his home here. A Rocky Mountain News article from 1955 stated "Even in competition with millionaire tycoons, best-selling novelists and top-ranking musicians, Herbert Bayer is Aspen's most world-famous resident.',2 During his years in Aspen, he resided at times at 234 W. Francis. a Victorian home iii the West End, in an apartment in a downtown commercial building. 501 E. Cooper Avenue, and in his home on Red Mountain. Bayer moved to Santa Barbara for health reasons in 1975 and died there ten years later, the last surviving Bauhaus master. Notable among Buyer's many achievements include his credits in 9.4,: -21 typography. He designed the "universal" type font in 1925 and was ~ .r..i.>':"- credited with "liberating typography and design in advertising and ~ . J creating the very look of advertising we take for granted today."3 Much Vi- pÂ·'AS.PEN of modern print design retlects his ideas. He was the inventor of 64,Â·Â·1,>ot photomontage. Bayer created the "World Geo-Graphic Atlas" in 1953, 6 47.,14, - <.< which was described as one of the most beautiful books ever printed in this country by the Atlantic Monthly and the greatest world atlas ever Poster, 1946 made in the United States by Publisher's Weekly. Bayer created the famed "Great Ideas of Western Man' advertisement series for the Container Corporation of America and had more than 50 one-man exhibitions of his artistic works. His paintings are represented in the collections of at least 40 museums. He spent six decades of his life working as a painter, photographer, typographer, architect, sculptor, designer of graphics, exhibitions, and landscapes. His last work was the 85 foot tall, yellow articulated wall sculpture at the Denver Design Center, which can be viewed from I-25, near Broadway in Denver. Bayer founded the International Design Conference in Aspen in 1950 and was named a Trustee of the Aspen Institute for LIumanistic Studies iii 1953. He was the Chair of the City and County Zoning Committee for five years and was very concerned with the issues of sprawl. Bayer promoted increased density in town, put the original tree protection ordinance in place, and helped institute the ban on billboards. 2 Robert L. Perkin,"Aspen Reborn: Herbert Bayer Changing the Town's Face," The Rocky Mountain News September 27, 1955. 3 Joanne Ditmer, "Schlosser Gallery Host to Major Bayer Show/Sale," The Denver Post October 1,1997, p. 1 OG.